1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

Holy Communion, as Holy Baptism, is a sacrament that all Christian Churches share in

common. It is dispensed not only once but repeatedly: in The Apostolic congregations in

every divine service, in other churches a little less frequently. The content which the

churches associate with the sacrament varies considerably. This is one reason why there is

still no common celebration of Holy Communion to this day between the different

denominations.

Just as the church is not only a community of memory but also one of hope

(Grenz,2004:3); so its worship is not only about remembering what God has done in the

past but also anticipating what he will do in the future (Webber, 2008: 57). Embracing

this tension in the present requires of worshippers more than just intellectual effort but a

whole-person engagement with the manifest presence of God. The celebration of

communion provides the perfect coming together of all of these: it involves the whole

person with its physical action, sensory input (visual imagery, auditory processing of

words/scripture and touch and taste of elements) and intellectual (memory) and emotional

(hope) engagement; represents both a memorial and a sign; and incarnates God’s

presence.

Whilst taking them into consideration, the church should not allow issues of practicality,

availability and efficiency to negatively impact on either the memorialisation or

manifestation of God’s presence that are inherent in communion. This means attention

needs to be given to what elements and what procedures are used and their perceived

symbolism in context, it is probable that, more than the exact nature of the ‘bread’ or
 2

contents of the ‘cup’, postmodern worshippers, with their high regard for community and

participation would value the unity and fellowship symbolised by sharing ‘one loaf’ and

‘one cup’.

There can be no argument (at least for the Christian community) that disputes the

institution of Holy Communion by Jesus the Christ, as evidenced in the gospels of

Matthew, Luke and John (Mt 26, Lk 22, Jn 13). However, throughout the centuries, there

have been many heated discussions on the understanding of it, even amongst Reformers

(Leithart 2000:23). Martin Luther believed that the Holy Communion is a presentation of

Christ’s body, whilst John Calvin believed that the sacrament is only a representation (see

Botica 2010).

Nevertheless, the Universal Church agrees that the Holy Communion is a Christian ritual,

as the church received a command from Christ, ‘do this’ (Lk 22:19). Moreover, the Bible

is explicit enough to suggest that this practice was carried out by an Early Church in its

liturgy (1 Cor 10:21; 11:17–34). It is of true significance that the Holy Communion has

been celebrated throughout the centuries and has preserved the lives or at least the faith of

many.

The elements used to represent Christ's body and blood is bread and wine. The kind of

bread, whether leavened or unleavened (Biscuit), is not specified. Christ used unleavened

bread simply because it was at that moment on the paschal table. Wine, and no other

liquid, is to be used (Matthew 26:26-29). Believers "feed" on Christ's body and blood, not

with the mouth in any manner, but by the soul alone, and by faith, which is the mouth or

hand of the soul. This they do by the power of the Holy Ghost. This "feeding" on Christ,

however, takes place not in the Lord's Supper alone, but whenever faith in him is

exercised.
 3

Communion was instated by Jesus Himself. The story is recounted in Matthew, Mark, and

Luke. If we consider the following passage:

“While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when

he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his

disciples, saying, ‘Take and eat; this is my body.’

Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks,

he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you.

This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured

out for many for the forgiveness of sins’” (Matthew

26:26-28).

Jesus uttered these words at the last meal He shared with His disciples before His death. It

was the Passover, a time during which the Jews commemorated their escape from slavery

in Egypt, and it was an important meal. The twelve disciples were gathered with Jesus,

and it was a somber time, though the disciples didn’t quite understand why. He foretold

His death, and His betrayal by Judas. However, He had also foretold that His death would

be “a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45).

In this ritual of breaking the bread and taking the cup, Jesus was reminding His disciples

of what He was about to do. As early as Acts 2, early Christians are recorded “breaking

bread” with one another. In 1 Corinthians 11:17-34, Paul gives specific directives for

celebrating what he calls “The Lord’s Supper.” Communion, then, was not a ritual

produced by later Christians, but something instituted immediately. It has been celebrated

ever since. From the 2nd century writings of Justin Martyr to the Fractio Panis fresco

depicting believers partaking in communion, history shows that the early church was

committed to the Lord’s Supper.

 4

The substitution is usually defended as necessary for those who are allergic to wine, and

for those who are battling alcohol addiction. That motivation is laudable, but it leap-frogs

the underlying issue. By what authority do we change the elements employed by Christ

when he instituted his supper? Do Christ’s words, “Do this in remembrance of me, “not

include the nature of the elements used in the Supper?

Many non-lutheran, Protestant churches have used grape juice in place of wine for many

years, motivated by the pietistic idea that consumption of any amount of alcohol is sinful.

“Lips that touch wine will never touch mine.” In fact, Thomas Welch, the inventor of the

pasteurization process for grape juice (1869), was a devout Methodist and a staunch

prohibitionist. He worked ardently for the prohibition of sales of alcoholic beverages in

New Jersey and surrounding regions. His pasteurized grape juice was developed first and

foremost as a substitute for the ordinary alcoholic grape wine universally used in

Christian Communion services.

The rationale for substituting fresh grape juice for alcoholic wine is usually based on the

term “fruit of the vine” used by Jesus in connection with his Supper. In the Gospel

accounts of Jesus’ institution of the Lord’s Supper, (Matthew 26, Mark 14, and Luke 22)

following the words of institution, Jesus says, “I shall not drink of this fruit of the vine

again until I drink it anew in the kingdom of God.” Fruit of the vine, the wine opponents

say, is a wider term than wine and thus can refer to unfermented fruit juice. But if fruit of

the vine permits us to use any fruit juice produced by a vine, then why not watermelon, or

cantaloupe, or cucumber, or tomato juice? Credible scholars from a wide spectrum of

Christian denominations agree that fruit of the vine as used in Scripture cannot be

understood as anything but wine produced from grape vines.

 5

And there are other practical and historical considerations that discredit the proposition

that Christ used fresh juice in his Supper. It is universally agreed that the Last Supper

took place within the context of the Jewish Passover meal. Every scriptural and historical

reference to the Passover indicates that the cup in the supper was ordinary alcoholic wine,

mixed with water.

Practically speaking, the Passover was celebrated in the spring, before the vines had

produced fruit. There were no fresh grapes available for fresh juice. The available fruit of

the vine was that which was bottled from last year’s vintage, which means it had gone

through fermentation and was alcoholic wine. Some insist on the existence of fantastic

procedures for preserving fresh juice in the ancient world, but if such a process existed,

why did Dr. Welch devote himself to his pasteurizing process? The truth is that before

Welch’s process there was only one certain way to preserve grape juice for future

consumption: Let it go through the fermentation process and turn into alcoholic wine.

Our church body has consistently taught that other beverages should not be substituted for

common alcoholic wine in the Lord’s Supper. However, because the wine used by Jesus

was very likely mixed with water, we do not speak dogmatically about the percentage of

alcohol required in the cup. Those with legitimate medical concerns with alcohol can be

offered a cup containing only several drops of wine in water. When we use wine in the

Supper we are certain that we are using what Jesus used in his cup. When we substitute

other beverages, we introduce doubt among the communicants.

Is this really the Supper Jesus instituted? Can I be sure Christ’s blood is present in a

substance other than that which he used? Are we scrupulously carrying out Christ’s will,

“Do this in remembrance of me” when we substitute other substances? Participation in

the Lord’s Supper does come down to faith or doubt. In the Small Catechism Luther
 6

wrote, “but he is truly worthy and well prepared who has faith in these words, ‘Given and

shed for you for the remission of sins.’ But he who does not believe these words, or

doubts them, is unworthy and unprepared; for the words ‘for us’ require truly believing

hearts.” Where faith in Christ’s words is so important, why would we do anything to

introduce doubt?

The common understanding of the Holy Communion is mostly on the application of

commanding-invitation, ‘Do this in remembrance of me’ (Lk 22:19 and 1 Cor 11:24).

Here the church finds credentials to perform such a ritual, as she remembers Christ. This

notion of remembrance is rooted in a Greek word anamnasis, transliterated as ‘anamnesis.

The word anamnesis finds its root in the Hebrew word zikazon, which relates to

‘memory’, ‘memorial’, ‘celebration’ or ‘cultic commemoration’ (Von Allmen 1969:23–

24). It is a course of re-calling, remembering, recollecting, relieving or even re-presenting

a past event (Dix 1945:245). This way of interpretation tends to deem the Holy

Communion as a ‘funereal Communion service’ (Vander Zee 2004:136).

However, anamnesis is deeper than simply remembering past events. The re-presenting

part of it refers to acting them out. It is all about remembrance in action and in

participation. It is the ritual that recalls the past event (or story), seeking to restore its

original virtue; therefore, it is much more than a mnemonic ceremony; it is re-present-ing,

re-enacting or re-living the event in commemoration (Von Allmen 1969:24). Anamnesis

provides a profound insight into the ‘real presence’ the experience of koinonia

(fellowship or participation) with Christ in his, life, death, resurrection and anticipation of

his second coming (Vander Zee 2004:136).

Anamnesis not only involves the past but also the present and the future of our

redemption. It is the community coming alive. However, in most cases, the Holy
 7

Communion is widely interpreted as a ‘meal of the baptized’ (Von Allmen 1969:61) or a

meal restricted to the baptised (Patte 2010:262). It is more exclusive than inclusive. In

some denominations, not everyone, who have been baptised are allowed to partake in the

meal (communion), instead it is limited to those who are ‘holier’, for ‘holy things are for

the holy ones’ (Leithart 2000:37).

What then makes Holy Communion ‘holy’? Is it the bread and wine, which represent the

body and blood of Christ? Or is it holy because ‘hallowed’ or ‘consecrated’ individuals

eat together? Or is it holy because the holy Lord communes with imperfect beings, who,

through the process, are sanctified?

It is important to note that in the gospels and in the Letters of Paul, the words ‘on the

night He was betrayed, He took bread and wine’ are continuously (and ritually) repeated

(Mt 26:26; 1 Cor 11:23). As much as Jesus knew that Judas would betray him (Lk 22: 1–

6), that Peter would deny him (Jn 18:15–27) and that Thomas would not believe in the

resurrection (Jn 20:24–29), he was still willing to share this important meal with them, the

sinners as they were, for betrayal is the shadow of love. Sinners were not exempted from

that table. This is the true proclamation of his death until he comes. He died for all, more

precisely; he died for sinners, not saints.

During Holy Communion, there is more emphasis on individualistic introspection, which

is perhaps more a reflection of Western individualism than the Middle Eastern (Jewish) or

African inclusivity. The Western understanding and implication would relate to

individualistic application, without taking into consideration that the Letter of Paul was

addressed to the whole congregation as a group, than specific individuals.

However, this is made to discredit those considered lessor in faith, and to disqualify

children, because they are not fit enough to make a conscious decision. However, the all-
 8

inclusive Christ once declared: ‘Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder

them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these’ (Mt 19:14). The Jewish Christ

would not be as exclusive as the Western Christ. The Jewish one would know that

religious education is achieved through participation.

Through sharing of the body and blood of Christ, the story of Jesus, the Jew, who

connected God (the Transcendent One) with the community of sinners, here and now, is

re-presented and re-lived. This is in line with Jewish and African rituals or ceremonies,

where the ritual’s focal point is never aimed at individualistic fulfilment only but at

serving communal interests as well.

1.1.1 Statement of the Problem

A 2005 report of the Inter-Anglican Liturgical Commission addressed the issue of the

elements used in the Lord’s Supper in Anglican churches. The Commission reported that

a surprising variety of substances had been used as substitutes for bread and wine in the

Supper, including rice cakes, biscuits, round cake, Coca-Cola, Fanta, banana juice,

pineapple juice, passion fruit, and raisins boiled in water.

As one of the sacraments of the Apostolic Church Nigeria, the Eucharist is meant to be

administered by Apostle, Pastor. However, with the Protestant Reformation and the birth

of Protestant ideology, communion began to change once more for those who adhered to

Protestantism. As Protestants fractured into dozens of denominations, various ways of

taking communion developed, until today where we have a multitude of traditions, from

the wine-vs-grape-juice debate, to the frequency of partaking, to church membership

mandates, to the communal goblet vs. little plastic cups.

1.1.2 Objectives of the study

 9

The main objective of this study is to compare the use of biscuit and other elements in

communion service in The Apostolic Church. Other objectives where:

I. To ascertain the effect of use of biscuit and other elements used for communion

and it effect on Christian believers

II. To ascertain the perfect quality of biscuits and other elements that should be use

in order to avoid high sugar level among the aged people who partakes in the Holy

Communion

III. To ascertain the way to encourage moral purity among the youth of the Apostolic

church Nigeria

IV. To promote the use of biscuit in place of bread, due to the nation’s economic

strangulation which have so far affected the price of bread

V. To promote the culture of communion among Christi an denomination irrespective

of the element used for the communion

1.1.3 Research Questions

The following questions where formulated to guide the study:

I. Is there any effect of using biscuit in the Christian Holy Communion?

II. What are the reasons for the use of biscuit in the Christian Holy Communion?

III. Is the use of biscuit in the Christian Holy Communion generally accepted in The

Apostolic Church system?

IV. Is biscuit accepted as communion element in The Apostolic Church Nigeria?

1.1.4 Significance of the study

It is the hope of the researcher that this study would be of benefits, to pastors, students of

Theological Seminary, and Church administrators. The study would be of great benefit to
 10

the pastors because it would help them know why some denominations chose to use

biscuit and other elements in the administration of Holy Communion. The pastor will now

be able to address such problems. The Church administration would benefit from the

findings of this research, as it will help them to adjust to the use of other elements for

communion.

The study would assist Theological Seminarians to know their role in the curriculum

development. The Theological Seminary would benefit from this study because it would

improve their knowledge as to why some denominations use biscuit for Holy

Communion.

Conclusively, this study will achieve it aims if it stimulates further scholarly research into

home variable and pupils’ academic performance in other parts of the state and the nation

as a whole

1.1.3 Scope of the Study

The research was undertaken to give a comparative analysis on the use of biscuit and

other element in communion service in the Apostolic Church Nigeria.

1.1.4 Limitation of the study

The study was limited to the comparative study on the use of biscuit and other element in

communion service in the Apostolic Church Nigeria only.

1.1.5 Research methodology

The researcher adapted the expose factor research design and therefore had no direct

control of the independent variable because their manifestation had already occurred. The

data collected from the field were organized and analyzed as raw as they were collected.
 11

Therefore the correctness of the findings is limited to the authenticity of the responses

from respondent.

1.1.6 Organization of the study

The content of the study is sequecially organized in chapters from chapter one to five.

The study carries a cover page, an abstract page, appendix as well as end notes and

references. Each pages of the research chapter is introduced with its variables.

1.1.7 Definitions of Terms

Biscuit: A small baked unleavened cake, typically crisp, flat, and sweet, a small, soft

round cake like a scone.

Communion: The sharing or exchanging of intimate thoughts and feelings, especially on

a mental or spiritual level, a relationship of recognition and acceptance between Christian

Churches or denominations, or between individual Christians or Christian communities

and the Church.

End Notes

Frequently Asked Questions: How do we distribute Holy Communion?

Resources Available for Download on the ELCA Website:
The Use of the Means of Grace: A Statement on the Practice of Word and
Sacrament. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1997. (Available in English and
Spanish)
Principles for Worship. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2002. (Available in
English and Spanish)
These Things Matter: Word, Baptism, Communion.
Division for Congregational Ministries, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. 1999. Video on
sacramental practices.
 12

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter will provide the review of works done by authors and other scholars as

related to the topic under the study.

2.1 Concept of Communion

The Holy Communion ‘is not an object, it is a way of life’ (Von Allmen 1969:20). The

term itself is not found anywhere in the Bible, but its usage is identical to other Biblical

passages. The adaptation of the term could be traced back to the Bible. To begin with, the

word ‘communion’ is derived from a Greek word koinonia, referred to in 1 Corinthians

10:16–17 as ‘fellowship’, ‘friendship’ or ‘participation’ in the body and blood of Christ

by sharing the bread and the cup of blessing (Patte 2010:262). As a participatory

experience, communion also means ‘communication’, ‘contribution’ and ‘in common’, in

the sense of the Latin word communis, with its Greek root koin, referring to sharing

something with someone (Wood 1996:217). ‘The koin-word group is translated as

fellowship, sharing, partnership, participation and communion’ (Breed & Semenya

2015:70).

Communion could also be understood by another Greek word ynaxis, which means

‘union’ or ‘community gathering’ n (Welker 2000:3). Koinonia and ynaxis epitomised the

lifestyle of early church (especially in the Book of Acts). In fellowship, the instructions of

Holy Communion were given by Christ as he shared bread and wine with his disciples.

The words, ‘this is my body’ followed by ‘this is my blood which is poured out for many

for the forgiveness of sins’ (Mt 26:26 & 28), imply the inclusive purpose of his death.
 13

This is far from being an individualistic approach. Von Allmen (1969) argued that the

Holy Communion:

Should be the final test of peace and unity in the church or,

to express it negatively, that it is over the celebration and

interpretation of the Supper that dogmatic and canonical

divisions are most evident. (p. 9)

It should reflect that the blood of Christ was shed for the many, that is, for everyone or

anyone. In this manner, the Holy Communion brings about an encounter amongst

humanities and between humanity and Christ. However, the Holy Communion or Lord’s

supper (as so.me call it) is not only about here and now, it is also inherently

eschatological or futuristic (Von Allmen 1969:9). Christ declared to his disciples (Mt 26):

2.2 The Root of Holy Communion

It is always difficult to trace any one institution back to the point where it actually

originated; for as soon as a certain factor is isolated as the beginning of any event, there

are found to be many factors that have been leading up to the point mentioned., Each of

these factors fits in a logical order and sequence and the point of origin that has been

selected as the beginning of the institution in question assumes its: we as one of the

events in the whole scheme or order. When we begin to talk of the origin of the Eucharist

or the Sacrament of' the Lord’s Supper, the problem v1hich confronts us is where are we

to begin.

For example, some scholars trace the beginning of' the Eucharist back to the Semi tic

people while others go back to prehistoric people and their meal habits. An example of

the latter position is presented by J., A. Magni in his dissertation, and The Ethnological
 14

Background of the Eucharist. He contends that extensive researches have revealed the

fact that Eucharistic rites reach back into the dim, prehistoric past of the race.1

Surveying the Appoline, Dionysiac, Orphic, Soma, Haoma, semantic, Mithraic, Aztec,

and Peruvian cult’s one discovers sacramental rites or faint traces of such in all of them.

The remarkable thing is that all, however far apart in space or time, embody as their basic

idea the prescientific notion of sympathetic magic. Primitive man believed that the

qualities of a person or thing could be transferred by mere contact. But the surest vmy to

assimulate such qualities were by eating and drinking. Now, whatever object was

believed to be embodiment of the deity was therefore sacramentally eaten for the purpose

of absorbing the divine attributes, and for renewing or strengthening the physical bond

between the tribe and its totem god.

In the earliest stages of human culture any material benefits were naturally sought, and

the most efficacious means was then believed to be the eating of living flesh of' a human

being and the drinking of its warm blood., In a more advanced civilization, the th

anthropic animal, as less repulsive took the place of the human victim. Crudely enough

the deity was supposed to take part in this cannibalic sacramente Later the god's are was

sublimated and etherealized by being burnt on the altare2

While Magni contends that the roots of the Eucharist can be traced to prehistoric peoples

and times, other scholars contend that the roots of the Eucharist as practiced in the

primitive Christian Church are to be traced back into Hebrew history and the celebration

of the Passover meal. As 'William Robinson wrote in his book, completing the

Reformation: "Whether the Lord's Supper was actually instituted at a Jewish Passover or

a special chaburah on the eve of the Passover, it was redolent with Passover

associations."3
 15

As the Jewish Passover celebrated the redemotion from bondage in Egypt, the Lord’s

Supper celebrated the New Covenant redemption from the bondage of sin. As the Jewish

Passover celebrated the redemption to a never life for Israel under the Law of Moses,

which was summed up in love to God and love to man; so the Lord's Supper celebrated

redemption to the new life of freedom and liberty for the new Israel with no racial limits,

under the law of Christ, which was summed up in love to God and to all men. 4 It is with

this latter view in mind that v1e shall proceed with the study of the Eucharist as related to

the Feast of the Passover. Reviewing the Last Supper as it was celebrated by Jesus and

the disciples to find the factors and incidents which led to it, we can find the roots of the

Supper in the Feast of the Passover.

Old Testament literature makes quite a number of references to the Passover. Exodus

refers to it in chapters 12: lf, 21-27, 43-49; 23:18; and 34:25. Leviticus has a reference in

chapter 23:5; and Numbers, in chapters 9: l; and 28:16. Deuteronomy mentions it in

chapter 16:1-8. Tne prophet, Ezekiel, has a reference in chapter 45:2lff of his book. Other

references are found in .Amos 5:21, 8:10; Hosea 2:11, 9:5, 12:10; Isaiah 30:29; Joshua

5:10; II Kings 23:21-23; II Chronicles 8:13-30; 35:1-19; and Ezra 6:19f .5

In many instances the accounts of the Feast are similar. all probability the best account of

the Feast is given by the priestly writer in his account dated approximately 500 B.C. and

found in the twelfth chapter of the book of Exodus. In this account, Jehovah is

represented as having spoken to Moses and Aaron to tell them that the month of April

was to be the first month of the year for all Israel.

On the tenth day they should take a lamb for every house a lamb without blemish which

should be kept until the fourteenth day of the month when it should be killed. The blood

should be sprinkled on the two side-posts and on the upper-post of the houses' wherein
 16

they did eat for it would be a token, and the Lord would pass over that house when He

smote Egypt with the plagues. Following should be the Feast of the Unleavened Bread,

which should be kept from the fourteenth to the twenty-first of April.6

However, the sixteenth chapter of Deuteronomy also specifically mentions the Feast and

its observance is required since, in the month of April, Jehovah did bring the children out

of Egypt. It is to be remembered that Deuteronomy was in all probability ·written in the

second half of the eighth century or in the early seventh century. This date is deduced

from the mention of certain forms of worship in the book ·which were not likely to have

been in practice before that period. Whether the Feast was observed at the time this

document was written cannot be stated definitely.

During the reign of Josiah, who was ruling the Southern Kingdom of Israel, the

Deuteronomic Code, which had been lost for a considerable period, was found in the

Temple of Jerusalem while the Temple was being repaired and cleaned. This incident

marked the renewal of the worship of Jehovah again. Hilkiah, the r1igh priest, made the

discovery and turned it over to Shaphan who, in turn, delivered it to the king. Learning

the contents of the book and being assured of its authenticity, Josiah immediately began

his reforms. One of his major reforms was the institution of the Passover: "Keep the

Passover unto the Lord, your God, as it is written in the Book of the Covenant. Surely

there was not held such a Passover from the days of the Judges that judged Israel, nor in

all the days of the Kings of' Israe1, nor the Kings of Judah.

The Ezekiel account of the Passover is practically contemporary with the Priestly Record,

the date of Ezekiel being aprroxbrntely 592 B.C. Generally speaking, it is very similar to

the reference in the Priestly account. Thus, from these accounts, it is evident that the Feast

was regularly observed prior to the time of the Priestly account in 500 B.C. Certainly it
 17

existed from 621 B.C, Whether it existed before this time would involve a scientific study

of the Old Testament references stated above and their documentary sources. It is

certainly reasonable to assume that the Feast continued to be celebrated from 621 B.C.

through the early Christian era.

This observance approaches as nearly to the idea of a sacrament as anything found in

Jewish religion. It does not rise, however, to the full definition of a sacrament since the

Jew had no thought of any vitalizing power of God .flowing unto him through this

channel. Still this observance does influence God since the commemoration of God's

great goodness in the past pleases Him and keeps Him propitious in the present.

This observance was, therefore, a means of Grace and not a sacrament. The celebration

of the Passover Feast from the time of the Deuteronomic Reform, in 621 B.C. early

Christian era is an accepted fact. It is also to be believed that Jesus, being a good Jew,

rigidly observed the Feast of the Passover. There are two specific reference s in the

Synoptic Gospels that bear out the fact that Jesus adhered to the Jewish custom. The first

incident related was early in his life. When Jesus was twelve years old his parents went

up to Jerusalem,, after their custom every year,, to observe the Feast.8

Thus, Jesus as trained from the age of a child to practice the ritual of his Jewish parents

and their religion. The second record of Jesus celebrating the Feast of the Passover is near

the end of his life and is mentioned in all of the Synoptic. In the Synoptic account,, Jesus'

disciples had asked where they should prepare the Feast of the Passover as it was the

season for it. They were directed to the city to the house of a man whom they should

identify with a pitcher of water. In the house, the upper room should be prepared for the

meal that Jesus and his disciples would enjoy together.9

 18

The season of the last Feast of the Passover was used by Jesus to institute the Lord’s

Supper. While they were eating, Jesus took bread and blessed it and brake it, and gave it

to them saying,, "Take, eat, this 1 s my body. And he took the cup and when he had given

thanks he gave to all of them and they drank all of' it. And he said, “This is my blood of

the New Testament, which is shed for many.” 10

There is no mention in any of these passages of the Synoptics that would lead to the belief

that Jesus at this moment was instituting a sacrament. There is little doubt that he was

speaking symbolically and was leaving behind him a memorial that could be celebrated in

his absence and in his honor. It is true that Matthew 27:28 states that the blood was shed

11for the remission of sins. However, since this author is the only one making such a

statement, it is quite probable that it was a later insertion. Bruce considers the phrase as

probably a comment on Christ's words supplied by Matthew. Bacon prints the words in

bold-faced italics, believing them to be a correction or addition made by the evangelist or

redactor12. The institution is an outgrowth of' two important thoughts that were no doubt

running through the mind of Jesus. First, he was in the midst of a setting and a season of

the year when the Pascal Lamb was being offered. This fact was, without a doubt, of

tremendous importance to Jesus.

2.2 Eucharistic Teachings of the Didache

The Didache, or Tne Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, has been acclaimed as one of the

greatest discoveries in the second half of the nineteenth century. The manuscript, dated

1056, was discovered, together with other valuable early writings, by the Orthodox

Metropolitan Bryennios at Constantinople in 1873 and published by him ten years later.

There is a very natural and active interest on the part of almost every student of
 19

Christianity in any discovery that promises to throw light upon the beginnings and early

years of Christianity and especially upon the figure of Jesus.

The Didache purports to be an instruction based on sayings of the Lord and given by the

tw1elve Apostles to pagans who wished to become Christians; therefore, it created a

concern of sixty years ago among students similar to the concern of today over the Dead

Sea Scrolls., It is the practice or scholars when any new discovery in ancient literature is

brought to their attention to inquire as to the form in which it was found; to scrutinize it

material, whether papyrus, parchment, or paper; and to examine the writing with an eye to

determining its date, and in general to interrogate, a series of particulars bearing upon the

all-important question of its genuineness. The Didache is cited by Clement of Alexandria

in his First Stroma; by Eusebius, (HIST. iii 25) and by Athanasiusin 39th Festal Epistle2.

Paul Sabatier insisted that the document presented such vivid marks of primitiveness and

genuineness, especially in the eschatological character of its piety, that it was to be dated

before the gospels, as early, he declared, as 50 A.D.3

The Didache has been edited many times and critically investigated by scholars of all

lands, but no agreement has been reached as to its date or the sources of its composition.

In fact, the date of composition has been a warmly debated problem; it has been placed by

capable critics in every decade of the century from A.D. 50 to A.D. 360. For example,

Paul Sabatier dated it 50 A.D. while, at the other extreme, some scholars pointing to a late

doctrinal development placed the compilation in the fourth century and inquired only

whether it was pure romance or a fiction containing but a substratum of' reality. J. A.

Robinson came to the conclusion that the manual was to be taken not "as representing the

Church of his own time or place, but rather as an imaginative picture of the primitive

Church, as it was planted by the Apostles in Gentile lands.''4

 20

Among scholars the Didache has been regarded as the work of a single author from

beginning to end, as a composition of the first century which has been modified by

subsequent interpolation, or as the elaboration of a Jewish manual of instruction for

proselytes which has been adapted and expanded for Christian use. Its historical

importance has been variously estimated according to its assignment to an earlier or a

later date, but with hardly an exception scholars have regarded it as a document of the

highest value for the history of early ecclesiastical institutions. Another factor concerning

the Didache, which is one of great debate, is centered in the question of the site of

composition.

Some of its statements seem to suppose a small town or rural community, but we are still

left to conjecture whether a Syrian or Palestinian, or an Egyptien provenance. Syria is

suggested by the hint of a possible lack of running water needed for baptism, by the

warning against the hypocrites, and by the mention of the grain scattered on the hills.

Other considerations favour Egypt as the place of composition: the testimony of Clement

of Alexandria (Strom. I. 20. 100. 4); the popularity of the Didache in Egypt; and the finds

of Greco-Coptic papyri.5 There are certain factors which point to Antioch, that important

Syrian center of paganism, as the place of composition. Syria, center of paganism, was

evangelized about 42 or 43 A.D. The Apostle Paul concluded his first missionary tour

about 45 or 48 A.D.

It was at that particular time that the problem of catechizing pagans came to

the .foreground and pressed for a solution. In 49 or 50 A.D., the Apostolic Council

looked into the matter and laid down the decrees as given in Acts l5:28ff. We can be

reasonably sure that about this time some uniform method of catechizing pagans was

worked out. Now, it is noteworthy that the very title o.f the Didache connects, at least, the
 21

first tract in one way or another with the "Twelve Apostles," and it is not rash to conclude

that it was their method of catechizing that round its way in to the Didaohe. 6
Then this

happened we do not know; but since the Didache offers somewhat modified form of the

Apostolic decree (see 6:2 and 3), some time must have elapsed between the year 50 and

the date of composition"7

Internal evidence of language and subject matter indicates that the Didache is perhaps one

of the earliest extant pieces of Christian literature exclusive of some parts of the New

Testamente It, seemingly, was written in the period from 80 to 120 A.D. Chapters nine,

ten, and fourteen give us the oldest elements of the Eucharist service. However, it is

noticeable that in none of these references is any mention made concerning the institution

of the Eucharist.

1. J. Ae Magni, 11The Ethnological Background of the

2. Ibid,
3. William Robinson, Completing the Reformation(Lexington: The College of the Bible, 1955), p. 49.
4. ibidp. 58.
5. w. J 0 Moulton, (Edinburgh: T. & lip· assover, II Hasting' s Dictionary of the
6. E.x. 12:1-28.
7. II Kings 23:21-22.
8. Luke 2:41-42.
9. Mark 14:12-16.
10. Ibid 22-24.
11. A . B. Bruce, 11Matthew, 11 Expositor's Greek Testament,ed. Vl. R. Nicoll (6th ed .. ; New York: Dodd,
Mead and Co., nd.), III, 312.
12. Benjrunin W. Bacon, The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate (2d. ed.; New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1918), p. 327.

2.3 The Apostolic Fathers and the Eucharisit

Near the end of the first century a unique conception arose in the Christian Church

concerning the Eucharist and its meaning. The author of the Fourth Gospel views it as a

means towards developing the spiritual life of the individual Christian and the Church of

his day. To the author the Eucharist, or Lord's Supper, was an agency that would lift men

to the higher conception and spiritual level of Christ. By some means, which are not fully

explained by the author, there is imparted to the connnunicant a mystical union between
 22

the believer and Christ. Also in this mysterious manner, the divine life of Christ is given

to the participant through the elements. At the beginning of the second century of the

Christian era, there came with the Apostolic Fathers an even greater development of the

significance of the Eucharist.

The teaching which is similar to that developed by the author of the Fourth Gospel but

developed to a fuller degree of Sacramentarianism was evident in the Apostolic Age. To

show this process of development let us now examine the writings of two of the Apostolic

Fathers, Clement of Rome and Ignatius, with the view of using their thoughts on the

subject as representative of the element

At the beginning of the second century of the Christian era, there came with the Apostolic

Fathers an even greater development of the significance of the Eucharist. The teaching

which is similar to that developed by the author of the Fourth Gospel but developed to a

fuller degree of Sacramentarianism was evident in the Apostolic Age. To show this

process of development let us now examine the writings of two of the Apostolic Fathers,

Clement of Rome and Ignatius, with the view of using their thoughts on the subject as

representative of the teachings of the Church in that period on the meaning of the

Eucharist.

2.3.1 Clement of Rome

The important work of Clement of Rome is his epistle to the Corinthians. A second

epistle to the Corinthians cannot be definitely identified as his work. By some scholars,

nevertheless, it is ascribed to him. Little is mentioned by Clement of Rome with direct

reference to the Eucharist. is fortieth chapter of the first epistle, he states:” In those,

therefore, who present their offerings at the appointed times are accpeted and blessed; for

inasmuch as they follow the laws of the Lord, they sin not”.
 23

This single reference is a little hard to connect with Clement's ideas on the sacrament.

Adrian Fortesque in his work, The Mass, A Study of Roman Liturgy, states that the word

used in the Greek text, meaning "oblations, and translated above, "offerings, soon came to

be the technical name f'or the offering of the Holy Eucharist. Here it may still include the

offerings for the poor.1 Since Clement stated the above verse in his chapter on Since

Clement stated the above verse in his chapter on “Preserving the Order Appointed by God

in the Church.," and since Fortesque has interpreted it as referring to the Eucharist, it may

be concluded that Clement recognized a particular value in the Eucharist. What the

significance may have been to him from a doctrinal standpoint, he did not state.

It is also evident that the Eucharist was observed at particular intervals in the time of

Clement, being a law of the Church. Too, it is quite probable that the observance may

have had some connection with the forgiveness of sins since "Clement stated that those

who present their offerings are accepted and blessed”2. The acceptance and blessing of the

individual would seem to imply that he had been forgiven of his sins.

2.3.2 The Epistles of Ignatius

The Epistles of Ignatius have several references to the Eucharist. A careful scrutiny of

each of these passages acquaints us with the importance and feeling that Ignatius attaches

to the Supper. In his Epistle to the smyrneans, Ignatius states with reference to heretics

and unbelievers: “Tney abstain from the Eucharist and from prayers because they confess

not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ which suffered for our sins 3.

In the Epistle to the Philadelphians, Ignatius insists that they have only "one faith, one

preaching, one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of' the Lord Jesus Christ" 4 His desire

when he writes to the Romans in chapter seven was for the bread of God, the bread of

life, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, the Son of Gods.5

 24

The key statement of Ignatius on the Eucharist, however, is found in his Epistle to the

Ephesians. His exhortation to them is to steadfastness and unity with an undivided mind,

breaking one and the same bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote

which prevents us from dying; a cleansing remedy driving away evil that we should live

in God through Jesus Christ.6 Ignatius' conception of the Eucharist from the above

statements is very much like that of the author of the Fourth Gospel in chapter six. The

Eucharist is the life-giving substance which, when taken into the body by the worshipper,

has a cleansing power and an ability to unite the participant with Christ. Ignatius striking

phrase, "medicine of immortality” indicates his similarity of belief to that of John, who

stated: "Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood, ye do not have life.

It is the guarantee of immortality and a means whereby on earth the participant is able to

partake of eternal life. In the age of the Apostolic Fathers, then, it may be concluded from

the references in this chapter that the relatively simple ceremony or the Eucharist, as

practiced in the early Church, rapidly began to develop into the Sacrament of the Lord's

Supper, forming the basis of Christian liturgy as practiced in later centuries by the Roman

Catholic Church. The statement by Ignatius very ably expressed this change when he

wrote that the Sacrament is the “medicine of Immortality” The idea that the sacrament

contained the power to give spiritual life and union with Christ began to receive

recognition in that era as being factual rather than mere theology.

1. Adrian Fortesque, The Mass, A Study of Roman Liturgy (London: Longmans and Green Company,
1912), p. 20.
2. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Cox, The First Epistle 0£ Clement, Vol. I: Ante-
Nicene Fathers (2nd ed rev.; New York: Charles Scribner's &sons, 1899), p. 16.
3. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Cox, The E istle of I atius to an rneans, Vol. I:
Ante-Nicene Fathers 2d ed. rev.; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1899), p. 89.
4. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, Cox, The E istle of I atius to the Philadel Ante-Nicene Fathers 2d
ed. rev.; New York: Sons, 1899), p. 81.
5. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, end A. Cleveland Cox, The E istle of I atius to the Romans, Vol.
I: Ante-Nicene Fathers 2d.ed. rev.; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1899), pp. 76-77.
6. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Cox, The E istle of I atius to the E hesians, Vol.
I: AnteNicene Fathers 2d ed. rev.; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1899), p. 56.
 25

2.5 Communion in Church History

Although it seems that the early church had very little of their worship prescribed to them

by the apostles, and it is commonly assumed that it was just spontaneous, many scriptures

in the New Testament indicate that it followed some form and that the early Christians

continued to celebrate this new covenant meal as part of that (www.litrugica.com). Acts

2:42- 47 gives the most extended information about what their worship services involved:

teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread and prayer (Burger, s.a:22). At first the early

church celebrated communion every time they met for worship (ISBE). It is apparent

from accounts in Acts and other Epistles, however, that it quickly became confined to a

meeting on the first day of the week (ISBE).

Thus two different worship services developed: One around the preaching of the word

and open to all; and a second one around the communion for believers only (Burger,

s.a:29). (This separation of different components of worship continued until the end of the

third century - www.liturgica.com). Mixed or pure red wine and common bread were

used as the elements in communion to maintain a close symbolic association (ISBE). The

agape meal/love feast always preceded communion and at some point in the service the

believers would greet each other with “holy kiss” of fellowship (ISBE). The agape meal

fell away within the first century for a number of reasons; some of which Paul addresses

in chapter 10 of his first letter to the Corinthians (Rayburn, s.a:88).

At the close of the third century communion had become a well-developed ritual that

continued to be celebrated weekly, and separately, from other worship aspects (ISBE).

This separation, however, became less about the exclusivity of participation by believers

only and increasingly because it was imbued with mystical meaning (ISBE). Mystical

meaning grew into an unhealthy fear and awe of the mysterious presence of Christ
 26

associated with the communion; so much so that from the fourth century on it was

commonly observed only annually (Wainwright, 1980:32).

Although now only “vaguely reminiscent of a meal” (Wainwright, 1980:32), its power

and substance was such that some pagan religions tried to copy it (Wainwright,

1980:373). During the middle ages, other beliefs about communion (like that of

transubstantiation) arose and fear of abusing the ritual increased. Rather than risking a

spill or fallen crumb, lay believers settled for watching clergy partake in communion and

doing so only annually themselves (www.litrugica.com). This separation of clergy and

laity, as well as growing scholasticism (with its debates over communion meaning and

practise) and the medieval church’s emphasis on personal piety, eroded corporate

participation in the communion (www.litrugica.com).

The Reformation sought to counteract this fear and other distortions of the communion

ritual (ISBE). The doctrine of transubstantiation was abandoned (Hestenes, 1999:52); and

the emphasis on thanksgiving and fellowship with Christ and one another was restored

(Hestenes, 1999:52). The reformers favoured weekly, or even more frequent, communion

(Wainwright, 1980:327). Although these were significant attempts to return to authentic

practise, there were other aspects of the reformation that could be perceived as

detrimental to the sacramental life of the Protestant church (Hestenes, 1999:52). The

emphasis on verbal communication of the word in preaching, and Christ’s manifestation

through it, detracted from his “real presence” in communion (Hestenes, 1999:52) and its

more symbolic communication of truth (Webber in Johnston, 1985:3).

Celebrating communion became dutiful obedience to a command (thus “ordinance”)

found in the written word (Hestenes, 1999:53) and much of the mystery was rationalized

out of it (Webber in Johnston, 1985:3). The so-called “Free churches” (a category to

 27

which the Pentecostal, charismatic and other churches belong) were motivated by their

own interpretation of scripture to disregard, and even purposefully resist, fixed

formulations for worship and what they perceived as “vain repetitions of scripture”

(Hestenes, 1999:57).

Their worship services were characterized by freedom, spontaneity and participation

(Hestenes, 1999:58). Pentecostal worship (then and now) could still; however, range from

fairly fixed liturgy to apparently none with one formulation still adhered to by most - a

weekly celebration of communion (Hestenes, 1999:58). Groups like the Quakers (who

relied primarily on revelation from the Spirit for instruction and not the written word)

“attached little importance to ‘signs’ such as ... wine or bread” since all things were holy

(Hestenes, 1999:58).

They saw communion with Christ as an “inward thing” (Hestenes, 1999:58). They felt

that the elements of communion were only “survivors” of the Old Testament and so not in

keeping with authentic spiritual worship (Williams, 1996:250). After World War 2 many

Protestant churches experienced a liturgical renewal (Wainwright, 1980:32). They revised

their services and consequently celebrated communion with greater regularity and

meaning (Hestenes, 1999:60). The holy kiss was also reintroduced as “exchange of the

peace” (Wainwright, 1980:31). From the 1960’s

Charismatic renewal impacted many mainline denominations and so charismatic worship

forms were often combined with the sacramentalism already present in those churches

(www.litrugica.com). Beginning in the 1980’s many (like Webber) criticised evangelical

worship, in particular, for becoming secularised and mere entertainment (in Johnston,

1985:4). The 1990’s saw the rediscovery of earlier reformed liturgies and once again

prominence was given to communion and other sacraments (Hestenes, 1999:54).

 28

Burger states that recently a number of contemporary churches have started having two or

more different services to cater for believers and ‘seekers’, with the communion only

celebrated in the former (Burger,s.a:31). Alternatively, large corporate Sunday gatherings

may involve mostly public worship, whilst mid-week community-orientated meetings

allow for intimate worship that includes communion (Leisch, 1988:32). In the

Postmodern emerging church, leaders like Brian Mclaren are finding alternative ways of

worshipping that often draw inspiration from ancient forms; embrace sacramental aspects

like communion; and experiment with creating liturgies of their own (Mclarensa).

2.3 Essence of Holy Communion in Christian denomination

As if all this wasn’t enough, in His abundant nature, God offers a multitude of provisions

through our participating in communion. Take a look at 1 Corinthians 10:18 and what

happens in the temple sacrifices. We note that those who eat the sacrifice also enjoy some

benefit from what transpires on the altar. Consider the people of Israel: are not those who

eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? 1 Corinthians 10:18 could it be that when

believers partake of the communion elements physically; we are also participating in

Jesus’ death in a spiritual manner as well?

John Piper phrases it this way, “By faith and by trusting in all that God is for us in Jesus

and we nourish ourselves with the benefits that Jesus obtained for us when he bled and

died on the cross.”2 He made it possible for us to have peace and right standing with God.

Jesus made it possible to live in freedom and not fear, to have hope for the future. He

brought deliverance from sickness and disease, wisdom to walk in the light and have

confidence. This ordinance is one of celebration and also one of spiritual covering.
 29

2.4 Different Ways of Celebrating Communion

Different churches and traditions celebrate communion diversely. There are three main

ways: through a common cup from which all drink, through intinction (dipping the bread

into the communal cup), or through the offering of individual cups and pieces of

bread/wafers. Below are some of the ways different groups of Christians have celebrated

communion and their reasons why:

2.4.1 Roman Catholic Church:

To receive communion, or Eucharist, in the Roman Catholic Church, one must be in a

“state of grace,” meaning one has not committed any “mortal sins” since last confessing.

This requirement is drawn from an interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:27-28 to not partake

in an unworthy manner. A person must then believe in the doctrine of transubstantiation,

which is explained by Catholic Answers as the Roman Catholic belief that the bread and

wine are “transformed into the actual body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ, and only

the appearances of bread and wine remain.” This comes from the interpretation that when

Jesus said, “this is my body” and “this is my blood,” He meant it literally. A person also

must not have eaten or drank anything besides water (with the exception of medicine) for

an hour before partaking. Finally, they must be in good standing with the Catholic

Church. Partakers receive the Eucharist from an ordained priest. Only Catholics and

sometimes Orthodox believers may partake.

2.3.2 Orthodox Church

The Orthodox Church also calls for fasting before communion, making the partaker

“hungry for God.” It calls for confession of sins to God, so as not to partake in an

unworthy manner (1 Corinthians 11:27). Great care is given to honor the sacred nature of
 30

the elements, as shown in this excerpt from the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San

Francisco:

When we come before the priest for Holy Communion,

our hands should not be in our pockets, but at our sides.
We make the sign of the cross, tell the priest our baptismal
name, hold the Communion cloth carefully under our chin,
and open our mouth wide. We do not slurp from the spoon,
nor should our teeth scrape on the spoon. After receiving
Communion we wipe our lips carefully with the
Communion cloth (not on our hand or shirtsleeve), make
the sign of the cross, and hand the Communion cloth to the
next person.
We are always careful that we do not allow Communion to fall from the communion

spoon or from our lips onto our clothing or to the floor. For this reason we move very

slowly toward the chalice and the communion spoon, and we do not pull our head away

quickly after receiving. We are careful not to bump the chalice or the hand of the priest.

After receiving Communion, we do not chew gum (or spit), because when we dispose of

our gum it may contain particles of Holy Communion.” Only Orthodox Christians may

partake.

2.2.3 Protestant Churches

This is where it is no longer easy to state what even a majority of Protestant practices.

Though the above can’t necessarily be true of all Roman Catholics or all Orthodox

believers, the structured and liturgical nature of these churches makes it more uniform.

Not so much for the myriad denominations of Protestants. Some, like Episcopalians,

usually use actual wine and communal cups, like Catholic and Orthodox believers. More

liturgical churches like the Anglican, Episcopalian, and Lutheran congregations tend to

receive communion from church leaders, perhaps kneeling at the altar.

Others, like Baptists, stick to grape juice. Baptist and nondenominational churches often

tend to pass around a tray of the elements or allow congregation members to approach
 31

tables and self-serve. This stems from a greater focus on an individual’s direct interaction

with God, rather than a person approaching the communion through the mediation of a

priest or pastor. Most, though not all, Protestant congregations practice “open

communion,” in which anyone who is a believer may partake in communion.

2.3 Significance of the Holy Communion in Christianity

The sacrificial system of the Old Covenant added to the context of the Passover meal:

God’s chosen people worshipped him with a sequence of offerings; divinely instituted;

and intended to glorify him and express their desire to commune with him (ISBE). The

Passover meal, then, was both a covenant-recalling and a covenant-renewing sacrifice

(ISBE). The symbolism of this meal just before Jesus’ death was, therefore, profound as

God’s provision of the final Passover lamb whose blood, shed in sacrificial death, would

deliver his people from slavery and into his promised shalom (1 Cor. 5:7).

The Passover meal, like the Old Covenant under which it was instituted, was changed

forever by Jesus’ words and actions that night. In all three accounts Jesus makes it clear

that he is introducing a new covenant, to be sealed by his own blood (Matt. 26:28; Mar.

14:24; Luk. 22:20 NIV). The original Passover meal now becomes the original New

Covenant meal (or “communion”) with specific elements and actions of its own which are

included in all three accounts: “the taking of the bread; the thanksgiving or blessing; the

breaking of the bread; the saying, ‘This is my body’; the taking of the cup; and the

explanation of the relation of the blood to the covenant” (NIV footnote on Mk 14:22).

In 1 Corinthians 11 the apostle Paul, referring to it as “the Lord’s Supper”, repeats these

again in the only other account of that meal. Only Paul and Luke mention Jesus’

command to continue to celebrate the Supper (NIV footnote on Mk 14:22) with Paul

adding a specific statement at the end of his account which emphasizes the memorial
 32

aspect of the meal and the value of its observance throughout the ages as a witness to

Christ (1Cor. 11:26; ISBE).

Jesus himself indicated that the next meal he shared with his followers would be in the

Kingdom of God (Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25; Lk 22:30); described by John later as the

“wedding supper of the Lamb” (Rev 19:9, NIV) – the ultimate communion. Jewish

worship already involved many material symbols (for example, altars, the presence bread,

the ark of the covenant - Goldingay,2009:120) and the elements of bread and wine used in

the Passover meal were part of many other worship practises too (e.g. drink and grain

offerings in Ex. 29:38-42) (ISBE). At this meal, though, the bread would have been

unleavened (Ex. 12:19). Although disputed, the drink was most likely wine; and probably

mixed with a little water as was Jewish custom (ISBE).

2.4 Elements of Communion

There are only two elements required for communion: bread and wine. These two

elements are consecrated prior to the Eucharistic celebration, transforming them from

bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. Substitute communion elements may

also be used in place of bread and wine. What kinds of bread are used and in what form?

Options and their rationale are listed below. Communion elements have changed and

evolved over time to meet the demands of a changing population. While bread and wine

were the original communion elements, wafers and single-serving cups of juice have

quickly grown in popularity.

These alternative elements are less expensive, less reactive and easier to procure in

single-serving quantities.

Wafers are easier to distribute than bread, smaller and less likely to trigger an allergy.

They are typically used as a stand-in for unleavened bread and are consecrated prior to
 33

communion in the same fashion as the other elements. Wafers have a better storage life

than bread and are more cost-effective.

Another lower-cost alternative to traditional communion elements is grape juice. Grape

juice in place of wine allows underage members of the church to participate in

communion. It is also available in small, single-serving cups for improved sanitation and

a lowered risk of spreading disease. Traditionally, the wine was sipped from a communal

chalice. The chalice now plays more of a symbolic role in most communion celebrations.

2.4.1 Leavened Bread

Some assemblies use leavened bread, bread made to rise with yeast. This is what most of

us think of when we hear the word “bread:” a loaf that is broken and passed at table. Such

communion bread can be baked my members of the congregation or provided by a local

bakery. The Use of the Means of Grace supplies more information concerning bread in

background 44B, which mentions the use of leavened versus unleavened bread. The use

of leavened bread is the most ancient attested practice of the Church and gives witness to

the connection between the Eucharist and ordinary life (44 B).

2.4.1 Unleavened Bread

Some assemblies use unleavened bread, bread made without a rising agent. This kind of

bread can be made more quickly. It is also called flatbread. Using unleavened bread for

Holy Communion has its roots in the Jewish Passover. Again, guidance from The Use of

the Means of Grace: Unleavened bread underscores the Passover themes which are

present in the biblical accounts of the Last Supper. Worship Resources: Frequently Asked

Questions we do not know what kind of bread was used at the last supper. There are two

schools of thought.
 34

One says that because Jesus and the disciples probably gathered for a Passover Seder

meal, the traditional unleavened bread was used. The other suggests that this was a meal

before Passover for which typical food, staple bread and wine, were used. The Gospels of

Matthew (chapter 26), Mark (chapter 14), and Luke (chapter 22) refer to the last meal that

Jesus ate with the disciples as a Passover meal.

The Gospel of John (chapter 19) says this meal took place before Passover. In the early

centuries of the Christian church, leavened bread was used. This practice is verified

through paintings, mosaics, texts, and sculptures from that time period. In the middle

Ages in the West, Christians began to use unleavened precut wafers.

This form of unleavened bread began to be used in the ninth century in the Western

church. Clergy baked the bread, as lay persons were not allowed to prepare it. Because

Lutheran tradition grows out of the Western tradition, Lutherans continued to use this

form of bread, often making connections between this form of bread and Passover bread.

It was also convenient in that it did not spoil and made few crumbs.

End Notes

Frequently Asked Questions: How do we distribute Holy Communion?

Resources Available for Download on the ELCA Website:
The Use of the Means of Grace: A Statement on the Practice of Word and
Sacrament. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1997. (Available in English and
Spanish)
Principles for Worship. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2002. (Available in
English and Spanish)
These Things Matter: Word, Baptism, Communion.
Division for Congregational Ministries, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. 1999. Video on
sacramental practices.
 35

CHAPTER THREE

THE HISTORICAL CONCEPT OF APOSTOLIC CHURCH NIGERIA

3.0 INTRODUCTION

In this chapter we shall consider the historical background of the Apostolic Church

Nigeria. The Apostolic Church Nigeria is one of the first Pentecostal Churches in Nigeria.

The Church has over 4.5 million members and a National Temple which serves as the

Convention ground of the Church Nigeria. The National Temple which is located in

Olorunda-Ketu, a suburb of Ikorodu in Lagos State, seats over 100,000 worshippers in a

service. The current National President of the Church is Apostle Samson E. Igwe.

3.1 History

The Apostolic Church Nigeria was borne out from the Apostolic Church of the United

Kingdom through three Missionary delegates who arrived in Lagos, Nigeria on

September 23, 1931; they were the late Pastors D.P. Williams (President), A. Turnbull

(Vice-President), and W.J. Williams (International Prophet). Prior to their coming, a great

revival started in the churches in fellowship with Faith Tabernacle Congregation of

Nigeria which resulted to much persecutions in 1930. In 1931, after exchange of doctrines

and other fundamental scriptural truths between the missionaries and leaders of Faith

Tabernacle Congregation of Nigeria, the leaders of the fellowship decided to affiliate with

The Apostolic Church of the United Kingdom and adopted The Apostolic Church as a

denominational name together with its principles and practices.

The Nigerian experience of 1916 was similar to the United Kingdom situation of the same

year. It was an experience of the surge of the Holy Spirit, as recorded by one of the
 36

patriarchs of the church, Pastor S. G. Adegboyega. He narrated his experience of the

month of March in the year 1916; when he attended revival meeting, conducted at the St.

Paul ‘s Anglican Church, Breadfruit Street , Lagos , under the distinguished chairmanship

of late Bishop James Johnson; and a similar one was simultaneously held at Anglican

Church Aroloya Street, Lagos in Nigeria conducted by Late Bishop Oluwole. These two

revival services had same subject focused on The Baptism of the Holy Spirit for believers

and efficacy of Prayer by believers through faith in the name of Jesus Christ.

3.2 Establishment of the Apostolic Church Nigeria 1931

With the upsurge of the revival services of 1929, there was an increase in the level of

persecution that arose against the Faith Tabernacle Congregation. It became increasingly

necessary therefore to get affiliated to a Pentecostal Fellowship abroad. However, the

Philadelphia Headquarters of Faith Tabernacle Congregation refused the request of the

Church in Nigeria to come to their aid.

The leadership of the Church therefore agreed to look to God in faith and prayer to send

deliverance from any quarters according to his will. Amidst these uncertainties, Pastor D.

O. Odubanjo, the leader of the Faith Tabernacle Congregation in Nigeria , was given a

magazine called “Riches of Grace” which is the official organ of the Church containing

the fundamental doctrinal beliefs of The Apostolic Church.

The leadership of the Church under the distinguished chairmanship of Pastor Odubanjo

studied the magazine and discovered the universality of the vision as there were lots of

similarities in the principles and practices of The Apostolic Church and the Faith

Tabernacle Congregation in Nigeria as recorded by S. G Adegboyega. He said 

“We discovered that their doctrines were similar to our own

 37

received from Faith Tabernacle Congregation in America. We also

discovered that there were doctrines embraced and taught by the

Apostolic Church of Great Britain which we found to be

scripturally sound but were not taught and practised by the Faith

Tabernacle Congregation of America”.

Letters were written to The Apostolic Church in Great Britain inviting them to Nigeria.

Before the arrival of the delegates of The Apostolic Church from Great Britain, there was

a persistent rumour flying around the church, that the Apostolic Church Great Britain did

not believe in divine healing (i.e. healing without the use of medicine!), a doctrine which

was warmly embraced and practised by the Faith Tabernacle Congregation in Nigeria.

The Conference of Pastors of Faith Tabernacle Congregation in Nigeria was held at

ljebu-Ode, to decide and to send a telegram to the expected delegates to cancel their visit

to Nigeria.

Pastor I. G. Sakpo (then a brother) who was not present at this meeting was raised up by

the Lord where he was at ljebu-Ode to deliver a very strong message to the ministers at

the conference. He came in to’ the meeting and began to prophesy. His prophecy focused

on the decision to be taken by the Pastors on the delegates of The Apostolic Church,

Great Britain. Through him the Lord warned the Ministers to desist from the negative

decisions and to allow the Apostolic missionaries to come to Nigeria. After his message,

the Pastors were caught with awe and yielded to the authority of God through the

Prophecy.

In 1931 three prominent leaders of The Apostolic Church in United Kingdom visited

Nigeria. They were Pastors D. P Williams, Andrew Turnbull and Prophet W. Jones
 38

Williams, who arrived Lagos on 23rd September, 1931. By 15th November 1931, all

conditions of agreement had been met and Faith Tabernacle Congregation, Nigeria got

affiliated with The Apostolic Church, Great Britain. During the morning service of

Sunday, 15th November 1931, the first ordination service was conducted and seven

ministers of God were ordained pastors. They were Late Pastor Esinsinade of ljebu-Ode,

Late Pastor D. 0. Odubanjo of Lagos, Late Pastor J. A Babatope of llesha, Late Pastor S.

A Mensah of Kaduna, Late Pastor E. G. L Macaulay of Zaria, Pastor I. B Akinyele of

Ibadan and Late Pastor S. G. Adegboyega. As a Protestant congregation, Good News

Bible Church thoroughly rejects the notion of our Savior’s body and blood being

physically present in the Supper elements. These elements are symbols. Communion is

an experience in which the Christian partakes and is strengthened in his or her faith by

contemplation and reflection, not in essence and reality. With the upsurge of the revival

services of 1929, there was an increase in the level of persecution that arose against the

Faith Tabernacle Congregation.

It became increasingly necessary therefore to get affiliated to a Pentecostal Fellowship

abroad. However, the Philadelphia Headquarters of Faith Tabernacle Congregation

refused the request of the Church in Nigeria to come to their aid. The leadership of the

Church therefore agreed to look to God in faith and prayer to send deliverance from any

quarters according to his will. The leadership of the Church therefore agreed to look to

God in faith and prayer to send deliverance from any quarters according to his will.

Amidst these uncertainties, Pastor D. O. Odubanjo, the leader of the Faith Tabernacle

Congregation in Nigeria, was given a magazine called “Riches of Grace” which is the

official organ of the Church containing the fundamental doctrinal beliefs of The Apostolic

Church. The leadership of the Church under the distinguished chairmanship of Pastor
 39

Odubanjo studied the magazine and discovered the universality of the vision as there were

lots of similarities in the principles and practices of The Apostolic Church and the Faith

Tabernacle Congregation in Nigeria as recorded by S. G Adegboyega. He said 

“We discovered that their doctrines were similar to our own

received from Faith Tabernacle Congregation in America. We also

discovered that there were doctrines embraced and taught by the

Apostolic Church of Great Britain which we found to be

scripturally sound but were not taught and practised by the Faith

Tabernacle Congregation of America”.

Letters were written to The Apostolic Church in Great Britain inviting them to Nigeria.

Before the arrival of the delegates of The Apostolic Church from Great Britain, there was

a persistent rumour flying around the church, that the Apostolic Church Great Britain did

not believe in divine healing (i.e. healing without the use of medicine!), a doctrine which

was warmly embraced and practised by the Faith Tabernacle Congregation in Nigeria.

The Conference of Pastors of Faith Tabernacle Congregation in Nigeria was held at ljebu-

Ode, to decide and to send a telegram to the expected delegates to cancel their visit to

Nigeria . Pastor I. G. Sakpo (then a brother) who was not present at this meeting, was

raised up by the Lord where he was at ljebu-Ode to deliver a very strong message to the

ministers at the conference. He came in to’ the meeting and began to prophesy.

His prophecy focused on the decision to be taken by the Pastors on the delegates of The

Apostolic Church, Great Britain. Through him the Lord warned the Ministers to desist

from the negative decisions and to allow the Apostolic missionaries to come to Nigeria.

After his message, the Pastors were caught with awe and yielded to the authority of God

through the Prophecy. In 1931 three prominent leaders of The Apostolic Church in United
 40

Kingdom visited Nigeria. They were Pastors D. P Williams, Andrew Turnbull and

Prophet W. Jones Williams, who arrived Lagos on 23rd September, 1931.

By 15th November 1931, all conditions of agreement had been met and Faith Tabernacle

Congregation, Nigeria got affiliated with The Apostolic Church, Great Britain. During the

morning service of Sunday, 15th November 1931, the first ordination service was

conducted and seven ministers of God were ordained pastors. They were Late Pastor

Esinsinade of ljebu-Ode, Late Pastor D. 0. Odubanjo of Lagos, Late Pastor J. A Babatope

of llesha, Late Pastor S. A Mensah of Kaduna, Late Pastor E. G. L Macaulay of Zaria,

Pastor I. B Akinyele of Ibadan and Late Pastor S. G. Adegboyega.

3.4 The Apostolic Church Doctrine Belief

I. The following is expected of the member of the Church:

II. A personal testimony of your salvation in Christ (Acts 4:12; Rom. 1:9)

III. Your acknowledgment of, and obedience to the Order and Officers of the Church,

Apostles, Elders, Deacons and Deaconesses (Heb. 13:17; Eph. 4:11; 1 Cor. 12:28)

IV. Your presence in the meetings of the church and abidance in full communion, that

is, not to absent yourself more than three times from communion without

sufficient reason given for your absence (Heb. 10:25)

V. Your conformity with the fundamental doctrines of the church, as well as with the

two ordinances, namely, Batism by immersion, and the Lord’s Supper. (11 John

1:9; Rom. 6:17;6:4; Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 1 1:24)

VI. That you contribute towards the support of the cause, as taught unto us in the word

of God. (Gen. 14:20; 28:22; Lev. 27:30; 1 Chron. 29:14; 1 Cor. 16:1-2; Matt. 23;

Heb. 7:8-17)

VII. 6. That you keep the counsel of the Church within the Church (Matt. 7:6)
 41

VIII. That you pray for and help every member, remembering that we are joint

members in the Body of Christ. (Heb. 10:24; 1 Cor. 12:25-26; 1 Tim. 2:1; Gal.

6:2)

IX. “Endeavouring to keep the Unity of the spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3)

3.4.1 The Apostolic Church Doctrine Conduct

I. Never come to the House of God without praying before coming. (Matt. 6:6; Eph.

6:18)

II. Be in your seat at the commencement of the service. You will thus be a good

example to those who are late and neglectful. (Gen. 22:3; Psalm 108:2; Prov. 8:17;

Song of Solomon 7:12-13)

III. Bring your children with you to the House of God. Relatives and servants also

have souls. It is your duty and privilege to take care of them. (Matt. 19:14; Exd.

20:10; Act. 10:24; John 1:41-45; Gen. 18:19)

IV. Make the Pastor your personal friend. His sympathy, support and counsel are

needed by you. Constantly pray for him. (1 Thes. 2:7; Joel 2:17; Mal. 2:7; Rom.

15:30; 11 Cor. 1:11; Ep. 6:19; Heb. 13:17)

V. Make the Church your spiritual home (Acts 2:46-47)

VI. When conversing at home, never speak disrespectfully or criticisingly of God’s

servants, or their ministrations, in the presence of your children. If you sow the

wind, you may expect to reap the whirlwind. (Gal. 6:7; Prov. 22:8; Hos. 8:7)

VII. Take your Bible with you to the House of God. (Ps. 1:2; 119:16, 72; Rom. 15:4;

11 Tim. 3:16-17)
 42

VIII. Enter reverently, pray fervently, listen attentively, give praise from a grateful heart

and worship God in the beauty of holiness. (Ps. 1 18:27-29; Eccl. 5:1; Rom.

12:11; Jmaes 1:19)

IX. “Enter into His gates with thanksgiving and into His courts with praise, be

thankful unto him and bless His name” (Ps. 100:4)

3.4.2 The Apostolic Church Doctrine and Tenet

The following are the fundamental doctrinal beliefs of the Church, based on the Holy

Scriptures and stated in summarized form. Such doctrinal beliefs as accepted and

confessed, and the personal experience and practices resulting there from, shall be

essential basis of the fellowship and union of the members thereof.

I. The Unity of the Godhead and the Trinity of the Persons therein.

II. The utter depravity of human nature, the necessity for repentance and

regeneration, and the eternal doom of the finally impenitent.

III. The Virgin Birth, Sinless Life, Atoning Death, Triumphant Resurrection,

Ascension and abiding Intercession of our Lord Jesus Christ: His Second Coming

and Millennial Reign upon earth.

IV. Justification and Sanctification of the Believer through the finished work of

Christ.

V. The Baptism of the Holy Ghost for believers with signs following.

The Nine Gifts of the Holy Ghost for the edification, exhortation, and comfort of the

Church, which is the Body of Christ.

I. The Sacraments of Baptism by Immersion, and of the Lord’s Supper. The

Divine Inspiration and Authority of the Holy Scriptures.

 43

3.5 The Purpose and Practice of the Holy Communion

Before one considers the appropriate use of various elements within the Lord’s Supper (or

commonly referred to as “Holy Communion”) attention must be given to the purpose and

practice of this memorial or ordinance in the Church. First it must be stated that

Christians are not in agreement on what to even call the Lord’s Supper or its spiritual

value. Some traditions refer to the Supper as a “sacrament”, a term that has popularly

come to mean “a conveying of grace”, rather that an event that helps men to relate

through faith to Christ1.

This view is most commonly seen in the Catholic Church’s view of communion known

as “Transubstantiation”, as well as the Lutheran Church’s similar view known as

“Consubstantiation”. Aside from most Lutheran and Anglican groups, Protestant

Christians view the Lord’s Supper as either: a memorial, a view popularized 2 by Ulrich

Zwingli during the Reformation, or an ordinance, which was the view held most in

keeping with that of Reformer John Calvin2. It was Zwingli’s and Calvin’s influence on

the Protestant Church which attempted to reject the Catholic notion of the Christian

eating the physical body of Christ and drinking the physical blood of Christ in the Supper.

Calvin further clarified this position by stating that Christ’s presence in the Supper was

“by contemplation of faith” and not “in essence and reality.

From the view it is pertinent to understand that the practice of the Lord’s Supper

commonly referred to as “Holy Communion”

3.6 Procedure for the Reception of Holy Communion

As we celebrate Corpus Christi, it is appropriate to remind ourselves of the proper

reception of the Eucharist. In Holy Communion we receive the Body and Blood of Our

Lord Jesus Christ. Christ is present Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in the Holy Eucharist
 44

under the appearance of bread and wine. It is a real not symbolic Presence. In order to

receive this great gift of love from Christ, we must do so worthily:

I. Be free from mortal sin: In order to receive Holy Communion worthily, we must

not be conscious of mortal sin on our soul. If we have committed a mortal sin,

then we must confess our sins in the Sacrament of Penance prior to the reception

of Holy Communion. We ought to be living in a state of communion with the

Church. For example, if we are married, we must have received the Sacrament of

Matrimony in the Church.

II. Preparation: We should prepare spiritually during Mass for the moment when we

will receive Our Lord in Holy Communion. This is done by coming to Mass

early, praying in preparation, listening attentively to the readings, responding to

the prayers, and participating actively in Mass.

III. Fasting: To prepare well prior to Mass we are to abstain from any food or drink,

with the exception only of water and medicine, for at least the period of one hour

before the reception of Holy Communion.

IV. Reverence: We have the option of receiving standing or kneeling. Anyone who

wishes to receive kneeling can proceed to the Communion rail. Communion will

be distributed there after the standing lines have finished receiving. Otherwise,

line up at one of the usual Communion stations. If standing, there is to be an act of

reverence prior to receiving. This is done by means of a profound bow (from the

waist) or a genuflection. The sign of reverence is made when the person in front

of us is receiving. In this way we are standing upright when the priest or minister

presents us with the Sacred Host2. If receiving at the Communion rail, no further

sign of reverence is necessary.

 45

V. Options of receiving: We have the option of receiving Holy Communion on the

tongue or in the hands.

a. Tongue: This is the traditional and preferred way to receive Holy Communion. If

we receive on the tongue, we should open our mouths sufficiently to allow the

priest or minister to place the Host on the tongue. The tongue should be extended

slightly.

b. Hands: If we receive on the hands, it is pertinent to place the open palm of one

hand over the other (in the form of a throne). After having the Host placed on our

hand, we can immediately place the Host in our mouth with the other hand. We

should never "grab" the Host from the hands of the priest or minister but rather

wait until it is placed on our hands4. Hands should always be clean and free of all

objects. If any particles of the Host remain, please consume them immediately.

VI. Response: The response when the priest or minister says, "The Body of Christ" or

"The Blood of Christ" is "Amen." No other responses are acceptable.

VII. Thanksgiving: Once we have returned to our seat and kneel or sit, we should

make a proper act of thanksgiving thanking our Lord for the great gift of His Body

and Blood. Jesus didn’t give very many specifics on how to take communion.

Instead, He gave an object lesson to His disciples: See how this bread and drink

are necessary to bring you life? In the same way, I will give you life. As shown

above, churches have reasons for differences in celebration and the elements used.

Often, it is a difference of emphasis: The Orthodox Church gives extreme care to

honoring the physical elements in order to honor Christ, while most Protestants

focus on directing internal thoughts and prayers to God and see the elements as

more of a metaphor.
 46

The Catholic Church focuses on coming to the Lord’s Supper pure of sins, while

Protestant congregations often call worshipers to repentance through communion. There

are hundreds and thousands of resources out there from all of the different traditions,

outlining reasoning for celebrating communion one way or another. Each offer interesting

perspectives on communing with God and honoring Christ. However, at the end of the

day, we all agree: communion is a powerful way to remember Christ’s sacrifice and show

our devotion to Him.

Three synoptic gospels record Jesus and his disciples celebrating the Passover meal as

their last together (see Matthew 26, Mark 14 and Luke 22). The Passover meal (first

described in Exodus 12 and then outlined as an ordinance in Deuteronomy 16) was an

annual commemorative feast for the Jewish people. When instituting it, God emphasised

its importance by also inaugurating the Hebrew religious calendar; the month in which it

was celebrated being, therefore, the first in the year (NIV footnote on Ex. 12:2).
 47

CHAPTER FOUR

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF LEAVEN AND UNLEAVEN BREAD AS

CHRISTIAN COMMUNION ELEMENTS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this chapter is to briefly discuss the use of leavened and unleavened bread

in the Eucharist of the Orthodox Church. It is commonly agreed that the bread Jesus

broke and gave his disciples on the night he was betrayed was unleavened. He was

instituting what we practice as the Lord’s Supper during a celebration of the Jewish

Passover, which required unleavened bread. At times the question has been raised, then,

whether or not Christians should use unleavened bread (Biscuits’) in the Lord’s Supper in

order to follow Christ’s example and to be fully biblical.

4.2 The Eucharist in the Canonical Literature

Having traced the background of the Eucharist, we can examine more fully some of the

statements in canonical literature in search for the attitudes that prevailed among the

authors of a few of these works. The simplicity of the Eucharist now begins to crystallize

into the rlte or sacrament of the Lord's Supper. The celebration of the Lord's Supper by

the Corinthians had become so extravagant and intemperate that Paul, while he was still

in Ephesus, felt disposed to write the Corinthians about this wrong and many other social

evils in which they were indulging.. His eleventh chapter of First Corinthians, verses

seventeen through thirty-four, indicates his attitude. That Paul regarded the Supper as a

memorial feast and related to the eschatological conception of the Christ is evident to the

most casual reader.. He even tells the Corinthians that the words of' Jesus were: This do

in remembrance of me, for as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye proclaim the

Lord's death till he come.

 48

His message on the Sacraments in this chapter is an effort to have the Corinthians leave

off the selfish indulgence and understand the real meaning of the Supper in a different

light than merely one of gross intemperance. There is little doubt that the commemorative

theory may have still been maintained had Paul only made these statements in chapter

eleven about the Supper. In chapter ten, however, Paul makes an even more significant

statement. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of

Christ? The bread which we bread is it not a participation in the body of Christ? These

words are important in the fact that they were introduced incidentally as part of the

argument that Paul was making against sacrificial worship to idols and demons. It may

also be assumed that these words represent not merely the Apostle's personal view but

they represent, as well, the view of the Christian Church of his

day.2

Another interesting point that Paul makes in this passage is his analogy drawn between

the Eucharist and the pagan feasts. The sacrifice of the heathens, or pagan peoples, was to

idols and demons and not to God. He desired that Christians should not have any

communion or participation with demons; it was not expedient for them to partake of the

sacrament of' the demons and the table at' the Lord. The assumption here is that, in some

way, a participation in the pagan feasts, or the Eucharist, involved also a participation in

the nature of the deities3

The account of the Synoptic Gospels referring to the

Lord's Supper is considered alike from a general standpoint. In detail, however, they are

not identical. The account of Mark is considered basic, and the Matthew account rests on

Mark and additional sources. The Lucian account reverses the order of the bread and cup

and in some accounts includes the statement, this do in remembrance of me." This

statement is considerably questioned and 1 s believed to be not genuine. So strong is the

 49

belief in this direction that Westcott and Hort, and several older works, have excised the

account from the Lucian account."8

A similarity in these gospel accounts is that each refers to the Supper as a Covenant; Luke

calls it a Newstates that the term, covenant, is borrowed from the institution of the law,

'referring to the covenant between God and the Jews with Moses sprinkling the people

with the blood of the sacrifice as a seal between them and God.

The New Covenant, in which the law is established in the heart, is sealed with the blood

of Him who died to make it a reality. This interpretation fixes the sacrificial meaning of

the flesh and blood. Jesus uses the elements of bread and wine that are before him as

symbolic of the sacrifice that he is about to make a death that is not to mean the current

idea of sacrifice but an illumined idea of sacrifice. 9 The question still remains: Did Jesus

intend to institute a sacrament? When we leave out the statement in Luke that is

considered not genuine, This do in remembrance of me, is evident that none of the

Gospels gives a connnand for the repetition of the Supper or for the continuance of it as

an institution.

Not only is there no mention of a continuance but, when we consider that Jesus'

eschatological outlook considered the world order on the point of dissolution and that the

end might arrive at any moment, it is hard to believe that he could have intended to

provide a long continuing movement of this kind. There seems to be room for the belief

from the statements in the Synoptics that the Lord's Supper is a survival of the Jewish

Kiddush," or .feast, characterized by the blessing of wine and bread which Jesus and his

followers consumed. The custom was continued by Jesus' followers with their club-meal

or Agape to remind them of' His death and His future return.

For the f'irst f'ew years, then, these observances were merely a simple piece of'

symbolism without sacramental significance In the Acts of the Apostles we find two
 50

passages that refer to the Lord's Supper. The first is found in chapter two, verses forty-

two through forty-six; the second is in chapter twenty, verse seven. The early group of

followers in Jerusalem were still faithful in their Temple attendance and in the observance

of the Jewish law. Nevertheless, the former passage mentioned above indicates that in

addition to their faithfulness to the Jewish law they also had their daily services in private

homes for the breaking of bread and prayer. These services served a double purpose.

They were a bond of fellowship and a means of support for the needy. Those who were of

the less well-to-do class were supplied by others who were more able to give support.

This practice resulted in a form of communism; they had all things in common." A more

significant purpose than the above was that it served as a continuation and a reminder of

the Lord's Last Supper with His disciples.11

The second passage reads: And upon the first day of the week when the disciples’ came

together to break bread, Paul preached unto them. Between the time of the occurrence of

this event and the one recorded in the first passage, a time of approximately twenty-five

years intervenes. Bishop Ellicott tells us that from this passage it is evident that the

Church had already begun to observe the weekly festival of' the resurrection on the first

day of the week, in addition to the weekly Sabbath. It is also reasonable to assume that

the observance had now taken on a weekly celebration in lieu of' the former daily service.

In any event, the Lord's Supper was still a social meal in form, taken as a reminder of the

Lord's Last Supper with his disciples.

The major reference to the Eucharist in the Fourth Gospel is found in the sixth chapter in

these words: Except ye eat of the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, ye have no

life in you,, (vs. 53). The author of the Fourth Gospel has introduced this sentence in his

statement following the narration of the feeding of the five thousand. It is particularly

noticeable that he has left out the record of the institution of' the Supper which is related
 51

in each of the other Gospels. Yet, it is to be remembered that the Fourth Gospel is not to

be considered as history; it is the theology of the author as he sees it in the period 90 to

100 A.D.

On the basis that the Gospel is pure theology for a certain period, we are concerned with

the author’s meaning o:f the sixth chapter and the verse quoted above. It is recognized

that this chapter presents two views; the first is that the Eucharist is identified with the

outward rite that was practiced in his day. The second point of view that is seen is the

communication by Jesus of His own mind and spirit to His disciples through the

elements. John recognizes the externality of the observance of the rite and the

worthlessness to the worshippers of the pure external performance. It was not his purpose

to discard the rite or lessen the value of the tradition that re st s behind the observance of

the Eucharist. What he is attempting to do is to substitute a deeper, more religious

conception of the Supper than was prevalent in the Church of his time. He had recognized

the danger to the spiritual life of the Church that was inevitable through the external

ordinance and consequently discovered in the agency of the Lord's Supper the means of

lif'ting men to the higher conception and more spiritual plane of life that is of Christ. For

the author of the Fourth Gospel the Eucharist is the symbol of mystical union between the

believer and the risen Christ. In some mysterious manner the divine life that was Christ's

is communicated to the worshipper through the elements of bread and wine, which

represent the actual flea~ and blood of the Lord.

4.3 Leavened versus Unleavened Bread

Good News Bible Church was compelled to examine the Biblical appropriateness of the

use of leavened bread (bread with yeast as an ingredient) in the Lord’s Supper on the

morning of May 3, 19981. It was at this time that a visitor to the congregation stated his
 52

inability to partake of “leavened bread” in the Supper due to the fact that leaven

represents sin in the Old Testament and Seder Supper, and its use would be “hypocritical”

for the Christian partaking in communion. Therefore, it is the intention of the researcher

in to research this matter in this paper and review the appropriateness of the use of

leavened bread in the Lord’s Supper.

4.2.1 Comparative analysis of Leavened versus Unleavened Bread

This is not necessarily a polemical work, and I have no intention of discussing other

practices and their merits or shortcomings. I will say, from the very beginning, that those

who become fixated with ritual at the expense of the content of the Gospel have

condemned themselves. Any rite that distorts the Gospel is plainly evil, but so too is the

obsession with a correct rite, since such a compulsion is a manifestation of deep spiritual

rot. While ritual should bring joy, since it speaks of the Gospel, our greatest joy should

be in acting out the Gospel towards those around us. We have not been called to just

attend services, but to repent, convert and serve others.

First, let’s discuss the nature of leaven. It is another word for yeast, a naturally occurring

plant. In ancient times, they didn’t know that. What they did know is that if you took

flour and water, kneaded it well and left it in a cool place for a long time, the dough

would rise. They also knew that this process would speed up if you saved a little dough

each time you baked to add to your next batch. This reserve is now called a ‘starter.’ It

was a good way to preserve yeast that made good bread, versus leaving the dough out

every night in hope that it would catch good wild yeast versus a bad one. Once the yeast

gets into the lump, it spreads throughout the lump without noticeably changing its color.

Yeast is both invisible and yet visible, since it does change the shape and texture of the

dough.
 53

If you keep adding flour and water to the same small lump of dough, the dough will

become sour with the waste products of the yeast. This is how we get ‘sourdough’ bread.

The sourness comes with the yeast staying in the bread a long time. So, we can see that

yeast bread involves a lot of work and reliance on our past bread making. Making

unleavened bread is much easier: once the flour and water are mixed, the bread is ready to

bake in a short time. There is no ‘starter’ from yesterday, so unleavened bread has no

past.

We can see the different symbolism that an ancient writer might use from bread baking to

represent certain concepts: leavening represents a connection with the past, a flavoring

when it becomes old, a force that invisibly spreads, a change that is also unseen,

complexity, activity/festivity and involves labor. Dough without leaven represents haste,

a break with the past, an absence of extra flavor, simplicity, inactivity, powerlessness and

a lack of labor.

Now that we have briefly discussed the possible symbols that one can get from leavened

and unleavened bread, let’s see if the Scriptures use any of them. The first mentioning of

leaven appears in Exodus 12-13. It is in commemoration of Israel’s Exodus that the

‘feast’ of Unleavened Bread is instituted. I have put ‘feast’ in quotations because this

word does not mean ‘merrymaking.’ It is not a feast in the sense that there is celebration,

but rather commemoration of the Work of the Lord:

And Moses said unto the people, Remember this day, in which ye came out from Egypt,

out of the house of bondage; for by strength of hand the LORD brought you out from this

place: there shall no leavened bread be eaten. Ex 13:3. Unleavened bread shall be eaten

seven days; and there shall no leavened bread be seen with thee, neither shall there be

leaven seen with thee in all thy quarters. 8 And thou shalt shew thy son in that day,
 54

saying, this is done because of that which the LORD did unto me when I came forth out

of Egypt. - Ex 13: 7

It is the Lord who brought Israel out of Egypt, not a work of the people. To remember

this they eat unleavened bread as a symbol of their powerlessness. They also ate the

unleavened bread because they left Egypt in a rush. And they baked unleavened cakes of

the dough which they brought forth out of Egypt, for it was not leavened; because they

were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry, neither had they prepared for themselves

any victual. - Ex 12:39

The Passover, which is eaten with bitter herbs, is not in any sense a feast or celebration,

but rather a ceremonial recollection of the power of God. Unleavened bread is even

referred to as the ‘bread of affliction’ in De 16:3, recalling the haste in which Israel fled

Egypt. This haste of the flight was important: it revealed that the people had not plotted it

but that God did it all on His own. They also remember the affliction they suffered in the

land of the Egyptians.

It is also important to remember that unleavened bread was also mandated only for the

seven days of the Passover (Ex 12:15). It is not an indefinite commandment, but one

limited to just this particular commemoration. It was also specified that leavened bread

was almost never to be involved with sacrifices (c.f. Ex 29:23, Le 8, Nu 6:15-19). There

is only one time when leavened bread was offered, to represent the thanksgiving of the

people: Besides the cakes, he shall offer for his offering leavened bread with the sacrifice

of thanksgiving of his peace offerings. - Le 7: 13Ye shall bring out of your habitations

two wave loaves of two tenth deals: they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with

leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD. - Le 23:17

 55

Leaven thus represents the works of the people, which they offer to God with

thanksgiving. While the Septuagint Greek text does not use the word eucharist to

characterize this thanksgiving, there is clearly a thematic connection between this

sacrifical thanksgiving and the one we make each Sunday. On the other hand, the

connection of unleavened bread to sacrifice shows the penitential attitude the people are

expected to have towards the sacrifice and the remembrance that forgiveness is the

Lord’s, rather than a work of their own.

In the Gospels, the word ‘unleavened’ is only used in reference to the ‘days of unleavened

bread’ (Mt 26:18, Mk 14:1 & 14:12, Lk 22:1 & 22:7, Ac 12:3 & 20:6). Never does the

New Testament admonish people to eat unleavened bread, nor does it specify that Christ

or anyone else did so other than what was Lawful according to the season. As for leaven

and leavened bread, it is used two ways in the Gospels. The first is to denote the power

of the Kingdom of Heaven. Another parable spake he unto them; the kingdom of heaven

is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole

was leavened. - Mt 13:33. And again he said, where unto shall I liken the kingdom of

God? It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the

whole was leavened. -Lk 13:20-21. The Kingdom spreads like yeast! Think of it: there is

no outside change when one repents and becomes a Christian, yet it somehow changes

not just individuals but the entire world. We can now look back on history to see how

Christianity changed so many people and see the truth here.

The second way that the Gospels use leaven is symbolic of the doctrines of the Pharisees.

These doctrines lead to false works and eventually condemnation. The likening to leaven

reveals the strength of attraction in the outwards acts of piety by the Pharisees, something

St. Paul will struggle against later. Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of
 56

the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. And they reasoned among themselves,

saying, It is because we have taken no bread. Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto

them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no

bread?

Do ye not yet understand, neither remembers the five loaves of the five thousand, and

how many baskets ye took up? Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, nor how

many baskets ye took up? How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you

concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the

Sadducees? Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of

bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. - Mt 16:6-12

Now the disciples had forgotten to take bread, neither had they in the ship with them

more than one loaf. And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of

the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod. And they reasoned among themselves, saying,

it is because we have no bread. And when Jesus knew it, he saith unto them, why reason

ye, because ye have no bread? perceive ye not yet, neither understand? have ye your heart

yet hardened? Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not? and do ye not

remember? When I brake the five loaves among five thousand, how many baskets full of

fragments took ye up? They say unto him, Twelve. And when the seven among four

thousand, how many baskets full of fragments took ye up? And they said, Seven. And he

said unto them, How is it that ye do not understand? - Mk 8:14-21.

In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people,

insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples -first of all,

Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. - Lk 12:1. The quote from

Matthew 16:6-12 is the most strident in warning people not to take this symbolism of
 57

leaven too literally. When speaking of leaven, he is not trying to make a point about

bread. If we think back to what leavening could mean, it brings up a whole spectrum of

word pictures: the leaven of the Pharisees is old and therefore ‘sourdough,’ it has spread

throughout the Jewish community, it is complex, it is ‘puffed up,’ it is a great deal of

work, etc.

This symbolism of leaven as the Pharisees' works fits with what St. Paul wrote to the

Corinthians: It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such

fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his

father's wife. And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done

this deed might be taken away from among you. For I verily, as absent in body, but

present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath

so done this deed, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together,

and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one unto

Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord

Jesus. Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole

lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven that ye may be a new lump, as ye are

unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the

feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the

unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company

with fornicators:

Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners,

or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written

unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or

covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no

 58

not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge

them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from

among yourselves that wicked person. - 1 Co 5:1-13

Here, St. Paul urges them to put away the leaven that was their old ways. They have

become ‘puffed up’ with ungodly pride, and have even allowed members to carry on as

they were before conversion in terrible sins. Like Israel, they are being called to put aside

the old ‘sour’ leaven of Egypt and start over. Notice that St. Paul is speaking in the

negative, which is why he is invoking the unleavened image. He is asking them to fast

from wickedness and remember the oppression of their sinful past, just as Israel is called

to do in the Passover.

St. Paul uses the same leaven image Christ used in his parables against the Pharisees

when addressing problems in Galatia: Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ

hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul

say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify

again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is

become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen

from grace.

For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus Christ

neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by

love. Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This

persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he

that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be. - Galatians 5:1-10.
 59

It should be obvious that leaven is a powerful image, and its positive or negative

connotations are completely dependent on context. Many of the Holy Fathers made good

use of leaven in the Scriptures to explain the teachings of the Church. As Christians, we

do not need to eat unleavened bread as a form of piety: The new law requires you to

keep perpetual sabbath, and you, because you are idle for one day, suppose you are pious,

not discerning why this has been commanded you: and if you eat unleavened bread, you

say the will of God has been fulfilled. The Lord our God does not take pleasure in such

observances. -St. Justin, Dialog with Trypho 12 While our Lord commands us to pray,

fast and give alms, St. Justin condemns the Jews for thinking that such actions alone

please God.

Here, the saint is requiring people to remember the reason for the observances and live

them daily rather than as just part of a schedule. Christians are not to fall into the

deception that certain practices, if done perfectly, are somehow meritorious: The apostles

ordained, that 'we should not judge any one in respect to meat or drink, or in regard to a

feast day, or the new moons, or the sabbaths.' Whence then these contentions? whence

these schisms? We keep the feast, but in the leaven of malice and wickedness, cutting in

pieces the Church of God; and we preserve what belongs to its exterior, that we may cast

away these better things, faith and love. We have heard from the prophetic words that

these feasts and fasts are displeasing to the Lord. -St. Irenaeus, Fragment 38 Instead, the

saints are constantly calling us to lay aside our old ways as with old leaven and start

anew. But we are not called to remain unleavened (i.e., weak, inactive) but to take up

new and godly activities: Lay aside, therefore, the evil, the old, the sour leaven, and be

ye changed into the new leaven, which is Jesus Christ. -St. Ignatius, Magnesians 10
 60

For this is the symbolic significance of unleavened bread, that you do not commit the old

deeds of wicked leaven. But you have understood all things in a carnal sense, and you

suppose it to be piety if you do such things, while your souls are filled with deceit, and, in

short, with every wickedness. Accordingly, also, after the seven days of eating

unleavened bread, God commanded them to mingle new leaven, that is, the performance

of other works, and not the imitation of the old and evil works. -St. Justin Martyr, Dialog

with Trypho, ch. 14

"Hear at least what Christ saith to his disciples, 'The Kingdom of heaven is like unto a

woman -who took leaven and hid it in three measures of meal.' So that the righteous have

the power of leaven, in order that they may transfer the wicked to their own manner of

conduct. But the righteous are few, for the leaven is small. But the smallness in no way

injures the lump, but that little quantity converts the whole of the meal to itself by means

of the power inherent in it. So accordingly the power also of the righteous has its force

not in the magnitude of their number, but in the grace of the Spirit. There were twelve

Apostles. Dost thou see how little is the leaven? The whole world was in unbelief. Dost

thou see how great is the lump? But those twelve turned the whole world to themselves.

The leaven and the lump had the same nature but not the same manner of conduct. On this

account he left the wicked in the midst of the good, that since they are of the same nature

as the righteous they may also become of the same purpose.."

-St. John Chrysostom, Homily 3 On Demons , sect. 2 "And this is the reason why He

called you leaven: for leaven also does not leaven itself, but, little though it is, it affects

the whole lump however big it may be. So also do ye: although ye are few in number, yet

be ye many and powerful in faith, and in zeal towards God. As then the leaven is not

weak on account of its littleness, but prevails owing to its inherent heat, and the force of
 61

its natural quality so ye also will be able to bring back a far larger number than

yourselves, if you will, to the same degree of zeal as your own."

-St. John Chrysostom, To Those Who Had Not Attended the Assembly , sect. 2

So, we see that the Holy Fathers saw both positive and negative meaning in leaven. We

must then ask ourselves: when we celebrate the Eucharist, shouldn't we use leavened

bread? Seeing that the Fathers see nothing evil in leavened bread itself, our first task

ought to be to examine the Eucharistic service itself.

In the service of Proskomide, the priest blesses it and says, “In remembrance of our Lord

and God and Savior, Jesus Christ.” We must then ask, was Christ not full of the Kingdom

of Heaven? Was He not full of the Spirit and good works to which the Fathers liken

leaven? It does not appear entirely inappropriate that we should commemorate the Body

of Christ with leavened bread, so long as it is not sourdough or made of coarse and cheap

flour.

And that the Savior received first-fruits of those whom He was to save, Paul declared

when he said, ‘And if the first-fruits be holy, the lump is also holy,’ teaching that the

expression ‘first-fruits’ denoted that which is spiritual, but that ‘the lump’ meant us, that

is, the animal Church, the lump of which they say He assumed, and blended it with

Himself, inasmuch as He is ‘the leaven.’

-St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies , Book 1, ch. 8, para. 3

If the bread and wine we offer are a sacrifice, then they can only be likened to the first-

fruit sacrifice of the Old Testament, since Christ’s death replaced all other atonement for

sin. And, as we recall, the first-fruit sacrifice was made with leavened bread. This is
 62

what St. Irenaeus is implying by his mentioning of the first-fruits. We offer ourselves

with the bread (i.e. the lump as the Church), but we are filled with Christ (i.e. as leaven).

We cannot offer ourselves apart from Christ as an unleavened loaf, and so we use a

leavened loaf to symbolize Christ within us as we offer the spiritual first-fruits of our

lives.

Unleavened bread is connected with mourning, something totally inappropriate in

connection with the Lord’s Day. The Eucharist is about the Resurrection as much as the

Crucifixion, which is why fasting is forbidden on Sundays and liturgies are festive.

Keep your nights of watching in the middle of the days of unleavened bread. And when

the Jews are feasting, do you fast and wail over them, because on the day of their feast

they crucified Christ; and while they are lamenting and eating unleavened bread in

bitterness, do you feast.

-Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book 5, Section 3, para. xvii

We do not eat the unleavened bread of bitterness on Sundays. The strong memory of

unleavened bread’s association with fasting and putting off old ways is not compatible

with the Lord who had no ‘old ways’ to put off and no sins to repent of.

The Anaphora prayers of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom speak of the bread in terms

of “the night on which He was betrayed.” While the combined witness of the Scriptures

draws a close connection between the Passover and the Last Supper, there is no unity

between accounts as to exact chronology. Christ’s final meal with His disciples may have

been in advance of the Passover because He knew that His death would fall on the exact

day or before it. We do not know for sure what kind of bread Christ broke when He said,

“This is My Body.”
 63

We can therefore conclude that unleavened bread is not specifically connected with the

Eucharist, while there appears to be a strong affinity between leavened bread and the

symbolism of the Kingdom of Heaven. None of the Fathers seem to have any dread of

leavened bread or does Christ, since He never Himself condemned one or the other. And

so, we can conclude that between leavened and unleavened bread there is a difference of

symbolism, and that leavened bread has a more favorable meaning when we speak of

Christ’s Body.

For the author of the Fourth Gospel the Eucharist is the symbol of mystical union

between the believer and the risen Christ. In some mysterious manner the divine life that

was Christ's is communicated to the worshipper through the elements of bread and wine,

which represent the actual flea~ and blood of the Lord. To the author the Eucharist was a

memorial from its external standpoint; yet, at the same time, it was a sacrament

continuing eternally through the symbolic elements which, when eaten with a sense of the

inward spiritual meaning, imparted to the believer the spiritual life of the Lord just as

food is assimilated and imparts strength and matter to our bodies. "Always to become

operative the sacrament must be accompanied by a belief in and a will to serve Christ.12

4.3 Evidence from Church History

While evidence as to the early church’s practice isn’t abundant, ordinary leavened bread

seems to have been the norm. A difference gradually developed between East and West,

though, with the East continuing to use leavened bread while the West adopted

unleavened bread and a distinction between Orthodox and Roman Catholics that endures

today. Biblical scholar Robert Letham suggests a reason for the Roman Catholic position:

“Since the leavened bread was more likely to crumble and so fragment the body of Christ,

Rome required the use of unleavened bread.”

 64

During the Reformation, leavened bread was generally used among Protestants, though

the Church of England continued using unleavened bread for a time before allowing both.

John Calvin considered the type of bread used an indifferent matter: “Whether the bread

is leavened or unleavened, the wine red or white—it makes no difference. These things

are indifferent, and left at the church’s discretion.” (On a related note, see Don Carson’s

recent Themelios editorial “On Disputable Matters.”)

4.3.1 The Institution of the Lord’s Supper:

The Bible records for us that the Lord’s Supper was instituted on the night before His

crucifixion (Lk. 22:19-30; Mt. 26:26-29; Mk. 14:22-25). This event took place at the

celebration of the Passover dinner, which was the most important celebration in the

Jewish faith. It was a deliberate and sovereign part of God’s plan that Christ be so

intrinsically identified with the Passover celebration, especially as the Paschal Lamb.

Yet, it is also unmistakable that during this celebration, which obviously used unleavened

bread, Christ was beginning something new. Lk. 22: 19-20, sees Jesus establishing a

“new covenant” with His followers. The power and importance of this statement cannot

be overestimated for He was making a definite break with the Jewish system in favor of

that which would be accomplished in His bodily death, burial, and resurrection in the

three days to come.

Thus, although the Seder, or Passover Supper, has clear spiritual significance in its

fulfillment in Christ’s death, it is ultimately a different celebration or event from the New

Testament practice of the Lord’s Supper, with the one seen foretelling while the other

seen fulfilling. Most congregations use ordinary bread (very likely leavened) for Lord's

Supper. The ministers, after admitting that unleaven bread was used during the Passover

meal when Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper, tried to justify the use of ordinary bread or

biscuits this way:

 65

a. The elements of the Lord’s Supper are the bread and fruit of the vine (Matthew

26:26-29). The Bible abounds with teachings on the significance of these two

objects but makes no specification to the kind of bread (leaven or unleavened) nor

to the container (one cup or many).

b. In facts, reading from the context, we are convinced that the early Christians used

the ordinary bread rather than the unleavened bread when partaking the Lord’s

Supper. For example in I Corinthians 11:20-22, Paul makes reference to the abuse

of the Lord’s Supper carried to the point of indulgence. This seems to suggest

ordinary bread (as those used in their ‘agape feasts’,) rather than unleavened

bread.

c. Church history records that ordinary bread was used by the early church for the

first 800 years. The Roman Catholic Church then introduced unleaven bread for

the Lord’s Supper to enforced their doctrine of "transubstantiation". Thus, they

changed the Lord’s Supper into a mystic ritual, teaching that the bread and wine

are trans- formed into the actual body and blood of Christ.

Ancient Passover rituals include drinking four cups of wine. Each cup has meaning:

I. Cup of sanctification

II. Cup of plagues

III. Cup of redemption

IV. Cup of praise or blessing

Jesus emphasized on the third cup during his Passover meal with the disciples as he

declared the New Covenant. This is the cup of redemption. He was referring to this cup as

he prayed in the garden “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me;

nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will” (Matt 26:39).

 66

Jesus told the disciples, “I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that

day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” This is the fourth cup! The

cup of praise and blessing that he will one day share with us in Heaven at the Supper of

the Lamb! Isn’t that remarkable?

4.3.2 Is there any Effect of Using Biscuit in the Christian Holy Communion?

Arguments against the use of leavened bread have centered on Jesus’s practice. It’s not

what Jesus used, proponents contend, and moreover, leaven is used to represent sin and

evil in the Bible. But, as Letham points out, the Greek word used for “bread” in the New

Testament (in relation to the Lord’s Supper) is not azymos, the term for unleavened

bread, but artos, the word for “a small round loaf of ordinary bread.”

The word Jesus used does not require unleavened bread or is leaven always a symbol for

sin and evil in the Bible. In the parable in Matthew 13:33, for example, leaven seems to

represent the kingdom of heaven. So the arguments against leavened bread are not

persuasive.

4.3.3 The effect of using biscuit in the Christian Holy Communion

Though not noted in discussions of the elements I’ve found, I think we should question

the very idea that bread is required. The church has been planted all around the world,

including areas where bread is unknown. Where bread is available, I don’t think

congregations should switch from it, even if bread is unusual and even if a switch could

“make the worshipers feel ‘at home’ in the liturgy and demonstrate the relevance of

Christianity to everyday life in its local forms,” an argument Geoffrey Wainwright

considers but rejects.

 67

To insist on bread where bread is unknown and wheat isn’t even grown would seem to

hinder Christianity from ever taking on an indigenous form in such cultures. I guess

Christian missionaries could teach new Christians how to grow wheat and make bread,

but would that not communicate that Christianity is a foreign religion, and make of an

indifferent thing a barrier to the gospel taking root?

For example, we are planting a church in Rural Akwa Ibom State where they have high

cost of living. After a congregation of believers gathers, we want to introduce them to the

Lord's Supper. What do we do? Import bread? Teach the nationals to produce biscuits? In

such contexts it is recommend using any common staple food that can be broken to fit the

symbolism of Christ’s body broken for us such as biscuits.

We can agree with Wainwright and Gregg Allison that using bread is supported by New

Testament example and the legacy of church history. But to insist on the necessity of

bread is to confuse what’s essential to the meaning of the Supper with what’s incidental.

We further agree with Wainwright and Allison (both of whom argue for the retention of

bread, if possible) that we shouldn’t switch from the traditional elements purely for the

sake of novelty. That would show a lack of respect for the seriousness of the Lord’s

Supper and the value of tradition. In the final analysis, though, I think the nature of the

elements remains an indifferent matter.

4.5 The Importance of the Communion Elements:

Understanding the purpose and practice of communion is foundational for further study

with regard to this subject. If one sees the Supper as a sacrament or means of grace, then

there can be no variation from the use of the original elements since the elements

themselves confer grace regardless of the spiritual receptivity of the participant. If

however, one sees the event as a memorial or ordinance in which he or she willingly and
 68

joyfully participates (under the restrictions of I Corinthians 11: 23-34), then the

importance is placed on the participant’s heart attitude, contemplation of the Savior’s

meritorious sacrifice, and spiritual receptivity, and not the strict and inflexible use of

certain elements.

It’s not about the bread and wine; it’s about the body and blood of Jesus. It’s not about

the ritual or the method; it’s about listening to Jesus and doing what He says. Communion

is not an obligation, but a celebration. Communion celebrates the Gospel: Jesus was

broken for us so that we can be fixed by Him. Celebrating communion marks the story of

Jesus, how He gave Himself completely to give us a better life, a new start, and a fresh

relationship with God (1 Peter 3:18). It’s not about a ritual to revere, but a person to

worship.

Jesus is less concerned about the method of celebrating communion and more concerned

that we celebrate it. As often as we remember Jesus, we should celebrate Jesus.

Communion is important because it’s a command to remember. Jesus wants us to

remember every time we taste bread and wine, and even when we sit at the tables in our

own homes, that He is the one who provides all we need. He gives us the physical food

that we need to survive and the spiritual nourishment we need to keep taking our next

steps with Him.

4.7 The Use of “Leaven” in the Old Testament:

The issue of objection raised in the communion service of May 3, 1998, was that “leaven”

is seen as a type of sin in the Old Testament, and therefore must not be used in the New

Testament service of the Lord’s Supper because it would correlate our Lord’s body with

sin (which according to II Cor. 5:21 was in fact the case). This is a good and sincere

question which must be examined in light of the evidence of Scripture, and not one’s
 69

personal bias or tradition. Therefore one must give attention to the occurrence and usage

of the term “leaven” in the Old Testament in order to either support or disprove this

statement.

The New American Standard Bible uses the term “leaven” eight times in the Old

Testament, while it uses the similar term “leavened” thirteen times. The use of “leaven” is

seen in a negative light in verses: Ex. 12:15; 12:19; 13:7; Dt. 16:4 in specific relation to

the Passover. “Grain Offerings”, Lev. 2:11; 6:17; were also not to be made with leaven.

However, it must also be clearly stated that the wave offering used in the Feast of Weeks

or Pentecost, was specifically commanded to be made with leaven (Lev. 23:17). Also, the

peace offerings of Lev. 7:13 were specifically stated to be made with leaven(ed).

Therefore, it is inappropriate to emphatically state that leaven is always sin, or else the

Lord God Himself would have caused the nation of Israel to sin, a notion know to be

patently false (James 1:13). It should also be clearly stated that the Jews commonly used

leavened bread in their daily diet, and traditionally only set this aside for the period of

seven days surrounding the Passover celebration (Ex. 12: 17-19). Next, one should

examine the occurrence and usage of the term “leavened” in the Old Testament to further

confirm or disprove this assertion. This term is used thirteen times in the first thirty-nine

books of the Bible, with the vast majority of its use found in Exodus 12 and 13, all

passages relating to the observance of the Passover.

Hosea uses the term in an obscure manner in 7:4, which places no real focus on the use of

the term except as an illustration. Amos also uses this term in 4:5, by way of illustrating

the unfaithful heart of the people of Israel, who although sacrificed in the prescribed

manner, and with apparent zeal, was far from God in their hearts. Thus, it must be clearly

stated that although the term “leaven” or “leavened” can be seen as a “type” of sin in the
 70

Old Testament, this typology must not be overstated. It is hermeneutically incorrect to do

so in a blanket statement. It is apparent, however, that in certain occurrences, most

notably the Passover celebration, that leaven can be labeled as a type of “sin”.

4.8 The Use of “Leaven” in the New Testament:

Having considered the usage of the term “leaven” or “leavened” in the Old Testament, an

examination of the use of the term in the New Testament must be made. The New

Testament uses the term “leaven” thirteen times in the NASB. Of these instances, six

times the term is used in connection with the teaching of the Pharisees (Mt. 16:6, 11, 12;

Mk 8:15 (2 times); Lk. 12:1). The next major usage of the term in a negative fashion is

found in I Corinthians, where Paul uses the term four times in the space of three verses

(vv.6-8).

Although a strong connection can be made between this passage and Christ and the

Passover, it is obvious that the first use relates to boasting or the immorality spoken of in

I Cor, 5:1-5. The second use of the term is found in verse seven. This use is clearly a

figure of speech used to exhort the Corinthians to remove the wickedness from their lives.

Finally the term is used two (or three if “unleavened” is counted) more times in verse

eight as a figure of speech or analogy for the malice and wickedness of the Corinthians.

The “unleavened” bread spoken of herein is certainly not physical bread, for Paul states

with all certainty that it is a figure of speech employed for his desire to see sincerity and

truth manifested in the lives of the believers at Corinth.

Again, it must be stated that not all of the uses of “leaven” in the New Testament are

negative. In both Mt. 13:33 and Lk. 13:21, Jesus specifically states that the Kingdom of

Heaven/Kingdom of God can be compared to leaven, in that a relatively small amount has

a great impact on a much larger body. It would be a terrible misinterpretation of Scripture

 71

to state that since leaven is sometimes used as a type of sin in the Old Testament that

therefore the Kingdom of God is to be seen as a Kingdom of Sin in the New Testament!

4.9 What the bread represent in communion

Food is necessary for our flesh and blood bodies to sustain life in physical form, but Jesus

says “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of

God (Matt 4:4).” This means our spirit is more important than our physical bodies. Our

spirit lives on for eternity, but our bodies waste away. By taking the bread, we are

acknowledging that we need substance physically, but more importantly we need

substance spiritually.

Let’s take look at a few examples of the important role of bread in the Bible: God

commanded the Israelites to eat bread without yeast or leaven during Passover (Deut. 16).

It reminds us that the Israelites had to leave Egypt in a hurry, but it also has other

symbolism. Yeast and fermentation is associated with corruption (1 Cor 5). Christ said

the bread was his body broken for us. His body was without corruption or sin.

God sent manna (bread-like honey wafers) down from heaven for the Israelites in the

wilderness. They were to only collect their daily bread and no more — same as he will

provide for us day by day when we feed on him. The exception was for the Sabbath when

they would collect a double portion (Ex 16). A double portion is also what a firstborn son

inherited!

God directed priests to offer him Bread of Presence in the tabernacle 12 loaves

representing each tribe and made from the same dough (Lev 24). It represented the

covenant between the Israelites and God. Aaron and his priest sons were to eat it in the

holy place. Now we partake in eating bread, representing Christ’s body, as part of the

New Covenant.
 72

Israelites were to give a grain offering (Lev 2). Jesus is the bread of life and he covers

our sins!

When Jesus taught the disciples how to pray, he included “Give us today our daily

bread” (Matt 6). Jesus fed a crowd of 5,000 with five loaves of bread (Matt 7).

Bethlehem means “house of bread.” Jesus says he IS “the bread of of life”! “I am the

bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. But here is

the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. I am the

living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This

bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world” (John 6:48-51)
 73

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Summary

While Jesus, Paul, or someone else may have instituted the Christian Eucharist, and

which may never be proven to everyone's satisfaction, one thing of' which the unbiased

investigator may be quite sure is the fact that the rite is rooted in a Jewish background

with the Passover setting. Before the coming of' Christ, the Jewish nation was strict to

observe the Passover feast. After the coming of Christ, the Judaistic religion and its

ceremonies continued to be practiced. Jesus, himself, being a good Jew, celebrated the

Passover at the proper season, using the last "Passover Season" of His celebration as the

opportunity to institute the symbolic and memorial service known as the Lord’s Supper.

During the first few years of the Christian era, the Church celebrated the memorial at

frequent intervals with large gatherings and amid much extravagance and intemperance.

The worshipers, assuming the character of a memorial feast, were observed to

commemorate the Lord who was expected to return at any moment. When the return of

the Lord was delayed and some Christians began to doubt the teaching of the Apostles,

the rite at this time assumed a new meaning a memorial of the death and resurrection of

the Christ. Canonical attitudes especially refer to it as a rite to be celebrated by all

Christians in commemoration of Jesus Christ.

The Apostle Paul especially regarded the Eucharist as a memorial feast and takes the

Corinthians to task for their intemperate manner of celebration. His passage alone quotes

Jesus as saying: “This do in remembrance of me for as often as ye eat this bread and drink

this cup, ye proclaim the Lord's death till He comes. 1 By the time of the writing of the

Didache, 80 to 120 A . D., the simple ceremony of the Eucharist began to be developed
 74

by the Church into a rite or sacrament. While the Didache represents the Communion in

its simplest form, it at the same time held a requirement that was binding upon those who

were to participate in the service: "Let no one eat or drink of this Eucharistic thanksgiving

but they that have been baptized in the name of the Lord." Thus, baptism came to be

required of the Christian before they were admitted to the Communion service

In the latter half of the first century and the first half of the second century of the

Christian religion, a different conception of' the Eucharist came into prominence among

Church leaders. The author of the Fourth Gospel viewed it as a means towards developing

the spiritual life of the individual and of' the Church of' his time. The Communion, or

Sacrament, for the author of the Fourth Gospel was an agency that would lift men to the

higher conception and spiritual level of Christ. By some means there was imparted to the

communicant a mystical union between the believer and Christ. In some mysterious

manner the divine life of' Christ was given to the participant through the elements.

With the Apostolic Fathers at the beginning of the second century there came an even

greater development of the significance of the Eucharist. Their idea was very similar to

that developed by the author of the Fourth Gospel. Ignatius very ably expressed the

sentiment of the period when he said that the Sacrament was the "medicine of

immortality2. The idea that the Sacrament possessed an ability to give spiritual life and

union with Christ had become quite prevalent in that period. The opinions of the Church

Fathers were, to a great extent, like those of John who insisted that life eternal only came

from having eaten the flesh and having drunk the blood of the Saviour.

By the time of the appearance of the Apologists in the defense of Christianity we find

new requirements concerning the Eucharist. There was a more strict belief concerning the

property of elements themselves. While they did not lose the physical nature that they
 75

formerly had had as bread and wine, it was believed that some transformation had taken

place at the time of the consecration of the elements. There were also three requirements

by that time before one could participate in the service. First, he must believe that the

teachings of the Apologists and Christians generally were true. Secondly, he must have

been baptized for the remission of sins. Thirdly, he must be living the Christian type of'

life that Jesus had re-quested. Tnese features indicate the growing importance attached to

the Eucharist and the doctrinal development that was slowly taking place as Christianity

lived on.

When we come to the time of Irenaeus and Tertullian the belief concerning the Eucharist

becomes more or less fixed for a considerable length of time. These men conceived of the

rite as a sacrifice. The elements used ceased to be merely the common elements of bread

and win. They were no longer common elements after the prayer of consecration had

been said over them. For Irenaeus, these elements were possessed of the divine Logos

which man, in turn, received into himself when he partook of the elements. Just as the

elements were changed at the consecration, likewise, -vras there also a change in the

participant on receipt of the elements in his body.

While it cannot be said that these lines of development in the Eucharist admit of the

Doctrine of Transubstantiation, as we lm.ow it in a later age, it must be acknowledged

that the Eucharist, while it retained its natural physical properties, participant on receipt of

the elements in his body. While it cannot be said that these lines of development in the

Eucharist admit of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, as we know it in a later age, it must

be acknowledged that the Eucharist, while it retained its natural physical properties, was

certainly believed to have been transformed in some way at the time that the elements

were consecrated for their symbolic use

 76

The Scripture makes no appeal as to the specific elements that must be used in the

celebration of the Lord’s Supper (Lk. 22: 19-30; Mt. 26:26-29; Mk. 14:22-25; ICor.

11:23-34). It can be accurately inferred that the type of bread Christ used in the initial

Lord’s Supper, was the unleavened bread of the Passover meal. However, there can only

be inference from Scripture as to this practice from that point onward.

V.2 Recommendations

To further reduce the cost of elements used in communion rituals, the research
recommends the following:

1. Christian denominations should adapt to the use of Biscuits as a Communion

element in order to reduce the high cost of purchase of bread

2. Communion elements have changed and evolved over time to meet the demands

of a changing population. While bread and wine were the original communion

elements, biscuits and single-serving cups of juice have quickly grown in

popularity. These alternative elements are less expensive, less reactive and easier

to procure in single-serving quantities.

3. Biscuits are easier to distribute than bread, smaller and less likely to trigger an

allergy. They are typically used as a stand-in for unleavened bread and are

consecrated prior to communion in the same fashion as the other elements. Wafers

have a better storage life than bread and are more cost effective.

4. Another lower-cost alternative to traditional communion elements is grape juice.

Grape juice in place of wine allows underage members of the church to participate

in communion. It is also available in small, single-serving cups for improved

sanitation and a lowered risk of spreading disease. Traditionally, the wine was

sipped from a communal chalice. The chalice now plays more of a symbolic role

in most communion celebrations.

 77

V.3 Conclusion

There are only two elements required for communion: bread and wine. These two

elements are consecrated prior to the Eucharistic celebration, transforming them from

bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. Substitute communion elements may

also be used in place of bread and wine. Grape juice is a popular substitute for wine and

wafers are often used in place of bread. Gluten-free bread is another common

replacement.

Before consuming the bread or wine, the items are consecrated on an altar. The

communicants generally recognize a special presence of Christ during the rite. While the

bread and wine do not actually undergo a physical change, most Catholics believe that the

substances actually become the body and blood of Christ in another manner. This process

is called transubstantiation. Other Christians believe the spiritual presence of Christ can

be found in the Eucharist while others believe the act of communion is more of a

symbolic reenactment of the last supper. As a symbol, unleavened bread would serve the

typology of the Passover and Christ’s fulfillment thereof. Also, it would be most in

keeping with the bread Christ apparently used in the initiation of His Supper.

Yet, a symbol is ultimately only important in what it represents, and not in and of itself.

The merit of the symbol does not reside in the symbol, but rather in what the symbol

represents. Also, there is substantial evidence in the New Testament that no food is to be

seen as either sinful or unclean. Peter was taught this lesson in Acts 10:9-16; and the

Church as a whole was reminded of this at the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15. This

monumental conference of the Church decided not to lay upon the Gentiles the law of the

Moses, but only exhorted the Greek believers to “abstain from things sacrificed to idols,

from blood, from things strangled, and from fornication.” v. 29. Again, the argument of
 78

an appropriate symbol in relation to the Lord’s Supper can be used, but an attempt to

legalistically imply a specific food item being “sin” is not in keeping with the teaching of

the New Testament.

If someone has a legitimate objection to the use of “leavened” bread during the

communion services of Good News Bible Church, that individual should be encouraged

to study the whole counsel of the Scripture with the pastor or elders of the congregation.

If this issue continues to be a stumbling block for an individual desirous of fellowship

within the congregation, then the principle from Romans 14, especially verses 13-21,

which commands the pattern for our behavior in this type of matter, could be applied, not

as a result of any sin inherent in the elements, but rather for the sake of the “weaker

brother”.

Communion typically occurs at the end of a Mass service. Those wishing go to receive

communion will stand up and form lines to the front of the church. The priest will place a

communion wafer in their mouth or in their hands, and they will be offered a small

amount of wine or juice in a communion cup, which they should sip immediately. They

will then return to their places and are encouraged to immediately begin silent prayer.

Communion elements are served and stored in special containers. From tabernacles to

house excess communion wafers between services to patens to present wafers during

communion, Matthew F. Sheehan carries the best selection of Mass tools at value prices.

Whether you’re looking for an individual tool or a complete Mass set, you’ll find the

items you need to store and serve communion elements at Matthew F. Sheehan.

Mass tools are typically made of gold or have heavy gold plating. This is meant to

preserve the integrity of the communion elements and to properly honor them. Mass tools
 79

may also have a white gold or sterling silver finish depending on the style of the piece, its

function and the price of the item.

There are no rules governing the style, size or finish of Mass tools, though communion

elements are usually locked away between uses to ensure their purity and to ensure only

those that are worthy have access to the blood and body of Christ. Visit Matthew F. Sheen

to find Mass kits in all styles and finishes. We carry everything you need to celebrate the

Eucharist in style and to serve your communion elements the proper way. Shop now and

get the tools you need for less.

Though there are some conditions that would exclude a person from receiving

communion, most members of the church are eligible provided their souls are free from

the guilt of a mortal sin and they believe that the bread and wine are the body and blood

of Christ. Besides being born again in Christ, a healthy body and mind are the greatest

blessings anyone can have. And the Holy Communion is God’s ordained channel of

healing and wholeness. On the night that He was betrayed, Jesus ate His last supper with

His disciples. And knowing what He would accomplish through His sacrifice, He

instituted the Holy Communion (Luke 22:19–20, 1 Corinthians 11:24–25).

His loving instruction is that we are to remember Him as we partake of the Holy

Communion. Jesus wanted us conscious of how His body was broken for our wholeness,

and His blood was shed for the forgiveness of our sins. And whenever we partake in this

consciousness, we “proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes” (1 Corinthians 11:26).

Today, when we partake of the bread, we are declaring that Jesus’ health and divine life

flows in our mortal bodies.

 80

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ayer, J. (1913). A Source Book for Ancient Church. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Banks, J. (1910). A Manual of Church Doctrine. Nashville: Publishing House of M. E

Church, South.

Bacon, B. (1930). Studies in Matthew. Nevr York: Henry Holt and Company.

The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate (1918). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Bartlett, J. The New Century Bible. Vol. XXVI: New York: Henry Frowde, nd

Bernard, J. (1929) International Critical Commentary., Vol. II: A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint John. New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons,

Bevan, R.. The History of Christianity in the Light of Modern Knowledge.. New York:
Harcourt and Brace.

Bruce, A .. B.. Expositor's Greek Testament., edition. Edited by w.. R .. Nicoll., Mead and
Company, 1910.,

"Matthew 6th New York: Dodd, Dodgson, c.. Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church.
Tertullian London: Parker and Rivington, 1854 .. ·

Driver, R. (1906). The International Critical Commentary. "A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on Deuteronomy." New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Fisher, P. (1923). History of Christian Doctrine. New York: Charles Scribner's Son.

Foake F. (1930) The History of the Christian Church from the Earliest Times to A.D.
461. New York: Richard R- Snith Inc.

Fortesque, Adrian. (1912) The Mass: A Study of the Roman Liturgy. London: Longmans,
Green and Company.

Gardner, P. (1915). The Ephesian Gospel. London: Williams and Norgate.

Goodspeed, J. (1931). Strange New Gospels. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Gould, P. (1907) A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint
Mark. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Gwatkin, H.. Early Christian History to AD. 313. Vol. II. London: Macmillan, 1927
Harnack, Adolph.. History of Dogma. 2 vols. Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1897.

Hitchcock, R. & Brown, F (eds) Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons, 1884.
 81

Kerlin, T. The Church of the Fathers. Nashville: Publishing House of the M.E. Church,
South, 1901.

Lake, K. The Earlier Epistles of Saint Paul 2d edition. London: Rivington, 1927.

Lightfoot, J. & Harner, J. `(eds.). The Apostolic Fathers. London: Macmillan, 1912.

McClymount, J. (ed.). New Centur~ Bible .. New York: Charles Scribner 1 s Sons, 1923.

McGiffert, Arthur c. A History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age. Revised ed. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1923.

Muilenburg, James. The Literary Relations of the Epistle of Barnabas and the Teaching
of' the twelve Apostles. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1926.

Quasten, J. & Plumpe, J. (eds.). Ancient Christian Writers. Washington: The Catholic
University of .America, 1948.

Robertson, A. & Plummer, A. International Critical Commentary_. Vol. II: A Critical

and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of' St. Paul to the Corinthians.
New York: Charles Scribners sons, 1916

Robinson, H. New Gen tury Bible. Deu teronomy and Joshua. New York: Henry Frowde,
n.d.

Robinson, J. Armitage. Barnabas, Hermas and the Didache. London: The Macmillan
Company, 1920.

Robinson, W. Completing the Reformation. Lexington: The College of the Bible, 1955.
Schaff', Philip revised.

The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles 3rd ed. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1889.